User talk:WoodyJoe

Welcome!

 * }

September 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Sharks (rock band) has been reverted. Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://travelsunderground.blogspot.com. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, fansite, or similar site (see 'Links to avoid', #11), then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest). If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 20:35, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Sharks (rock band) do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://www.the-fly.co.uk/words/reviews/live-reviews/8566/live-review:-sharks. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 13:53, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Sharks (rock band)


The article Sharks (rock band) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non notable start-up  band. Fails WP:BAND on points 1 - 12. Sources do  not  comply  with  WP:R and  are mainly  blogs, non-notable websites, agent's web sites, and other self-published sources or promotion. Individual band  members do  not  appear to  have notable solo  careers within  WP:BAND.

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. Kudpung (talk) 01:24, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * For the record, this issue was addressed a long time ago, as found on the article's discussion page. WoodyJoe (talk) 12:42, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

External links: final warning
This is your final warning. Please refrain from adding inappropriate external links or you will be blocked from editing. Thsnk you.--Kudpung (talk) 21:55, 10 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi! The WPN:ELNO policy clearly states "Except for a link to an official page of the article's subject, one should generally avoid: ...". As these are official links, I really don't see what the problem is, which I why I reinstated them.  WoodyJoe (talk) 11:05, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Sharks
This is just to let you know that all promotional text will be removed from this article for you. In its present form it may be considered adverting/promotion and subject to one or more Wikipedia deletion policies.--Kudpung (talk) 22:13, 10 December 2010 (UTC)


 * The announcement of a forthcoming album is routine for bands and can be found all over Wikipedia. I do not see how this is against the policy in question.  WoodyJoe (talk) 11:07, 11 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Please see WP:OTHERSTUFF. The Sharks article may now soon be sent for deletion discussion if it does not meet Wikipedia criteria for notability at WP:BAND. Thank you. --Kudpung (talk) 13:29, 11 December 2010 (UTC)


 * The notability issue has been addressed at length on the discussion page of the Sharks article. I find it very frustrating that someone with your Wikipedia experience, yet with no evident familiarity with music pages, has taken such a dislike to the Sharks page, despite the fact that it is well structured, well written, and within Wikipedia rules, if only just.  I am now minded to take this matter to dispute resolution, if you do not address the substance of my replies to your queries.  No-one else, aside from you, seems to have a problem with the page. WoodyJoe (talk) 13:38, 11 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, it is indeed, as you correctly state, a borderline case. There was no 'discussion'  on  the talk  page, only  your comments, and my polite and repeated drawing of your attention to polisics. You can take it to dispute resolution after the community has decided jointly by due process whether the article will be kept or deleted. Until then there is no dispute, and you may find that the consensus will be to keep the article. Until then the article will remain in its present form, and I ask you to comply with proper procedure and not to make personal attacks at the people who voluntarily build the Wikipedia. Thank you for your comprehension. --Kudpung (talk) 13:54, 11 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your comments. I also wrote to you via your talk page to indicate that I felt personally gotten at when you threatened to ban me, even though I stayed clearly within the rules (I posted a link to an official networking page of the article's subject). The fact that there was no discussion on teh article page itself indicates perhaps that only you have a problem with the page. Overall, despite all that you say about your own ostensibly sensible attitude the processes of Wikipedia, I find this a thoroughly unpleasant experience and one that makes me wonder if it's really worth struggling with one man, when all I want to do is make a well considered contribution. Maybe I should stick to writing for print publications. WoodyJoe (talk) 14:18, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Images
Please read Images, particularly this part "Poor quality images (too dark, blurry, etc.) or where the subject in the image is too small, hidden in clutter, ambiguous or otherwise not obvious, should not be used." Thank you. --CutOffTies (talk) 03:04, 19 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I saw that you replaced two images of mine, 'Craig Finn' and 'The Gaslight Anthem'. The 'Craig Finn' image I uploaded was much better then the one that was previously on the page. I would not call it grainy, but if you think so... 'The Gaslight Anthem' image was not a camera phone image, as you claim, but a Canon Powershot image, even if at 800ASA (as you could have known if you had bothered to check the image details). The reason I uploaded it was that the previous image, which is the one you have restored, shows the band in its early days on a tiny stage and does not accurately reflect the standing of the band today. There are plenty photos online that show their faces, so that wasn't the most important factor in my opinion. WoodyJoe (talk) 09:13, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Sharks2012.jpg


A tag has been placed on File:Sharks2012.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to 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 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. Stefan2 (talk) 14:09, 7 February 2012 (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) 14:23, 24 November 2015 (UTC)