User talk:Zeke, the Mad Horrorist/Archive 2

Talkback
Mat ty. 007 19:37, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Re: My GA Review
Aww man! I thought the article would finally get out of the nominations page. But no worries, take your time. I'm taking exams right now and they'll last for 1-2 weeks. So I would take time to reply to GA comments anyway, so I think it's okay :) Hopefully, your browser/server issues are fixed quickly. Cheers, --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 08:13, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey, no worries! GA fails are a part of WikiLife :) --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 16:26, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Interestingly, my first gan resulted in failure. Then I had six consecutive passes and now a fail again. So it's okay. I doubt if there is any user out there without any fails (if they've ever nominated in the first place). --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 19:01, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Talkback from Technical 13
Technical 13 (talk) 20:43, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

GA OF Tape Vol. 2
Hi. This is to let you know that I have addressed the issues you said on the GA review. Thanks. 和DITOR E tails 22:15, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

A donut for you
Donuts for you, for passing the GA review. I'll find you some free OF donuts if I can. Thanks a lot! 和DITOR E tails 22:51, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Prior to the Fire
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Prior to the Fire you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Quadell -- 13:01, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Prior to the Fire
The article Prior to the Fire you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Prior to the Fire for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Quadell -- 14:51, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Prior to the Fire
The article Prior to the Fire you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Prior to the Fire for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Quadell -- 18:22, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Regarding two of my GA nominees
Although I understand that the audio files I uploaded were too long and violated the proper practice for the articles to be GA. But when you fail the two of them (Daybreaker & Astraea) mere hours after the template was added by the bot, and the same day I corrected those files, it just seems excessive. Why did you not give me time to upload new ones? Jonjonjohny (talk) 10:48, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Three Days Grace again....
"Sigh", we now have another editor attempting to derail our consensus along with Teressa44. This one goes by the name of STATicVapor, and says Matt Walst is...."pretty much" the new lead singer and since he is "pretty much" the singer, that is enough of a source to list him as the official replacement for Adam. I politely informed him that we had previously come to a consensus about this but the editor kept reverting to Teressa44's version of the article. I'm getting pretty tired of this whole thing to be honest. TJD2 (talk) 04:15, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Earthless discography
Hello,, and thank you for your contributions!

An article you worked on Earthless discography, appears to be directly copied from http://www.itemvn.com/album/Earthless-Sonic-Prayer/71ECF33375. Please take a minute to make sure that the text is freely licensed and properly attributed as a reference, otherwise the article may be deleted.

It's entirely possible that this bot made a mistake, so please feel free to remove this notice and the tag it placed on Earthless discography if necessary. MadmanBot (talk) 17:39, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 30
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mortal Kombat: Deadly Alliance, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sub-Zero (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) 09:00, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Earthless discography, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Platonic (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) 09:04, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Earthless discography, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Analog (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) 09:38, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

A collaboration if interested
Buddy, pal, how are you? Interested in reviewing another small article with lengthy title?--Вик Ретлхед (talk) 20:31, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Hey! I'll give that some thought. I might start on that soon. It would be a pleasure.  Lazy Bastard  Guy  16:27, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Hey, no worries, someone else did the job. Thanks for the positive response anyway.--Вик Ретлхед (talk) 20:33, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Not sure how to message you back
Thank you for the explanation. I have not posted reasons for my reverting because I am not sure how to post messages. Hopefully, this is the correct way and I am not going against another protocol. I guess my pages will be deleted, and that is fine I guess. I will shy away from creating content. Thanks for your help, sorry for causing any hubbub in the wiki community.Awwwsnap (talk) 17:10, 19 February 2014 (UTC)AwwwSnap

Rocksmith DLC
Hey. I saw your comments on the Rocksmith DLC talk page about trying to improve the quality of it and (more specific to what I did) bring a lot of the information to one spot. The result of which is this: List of songs in Rocksmith 2014. However I'm unsure how to proceed from here, as I don't want to outright replace the old page (though some information should be removed due to no backwards compatibility) and removing the tracklisting from Rocksmith 2014 would leave the page a little empty..

Feel free to let me know your thoughts, otherwise I'll try to come up with a way to do it on my own.

Thanks,

irtrav (talk) 02:42, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of Deadliest Warrior episodes
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of Deadliest Warrior episodes. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hello Master
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Hello Master you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Вик Ретлхед -- 16:30, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Missing Wikipedians
Hi,

I saw you left this note: User_talk:Punctured_Bicycle, and I am wondering if everyone adding names to WP:MISS checks the complete history to see if someone left an edit note saying they do not want to be added? XOttawahitech (talk) 10:55, 28 February 2014 (UTC) (Please notify when reponding, thanks)

Your GA nomination of Hello Master
The article Hello Master you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Hello Master for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Вик Ретлхед -- 23:21, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Precious
  Prior to the Fire

Thank you, gnomish editor with a chaotic muse, for quality articles on songs and albums, such as Prior to the Fire, for edit summaries that are a pleasure to read and for, for , - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:13, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Good Morning Britain (1983)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Good Morning Britain (1983). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Gender representation in video games
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Gender representation in video games. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 18:56, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Followup on Frames (Lee DeWyze album) GA review
Hi. Thanks a lot for doing the GA review on Frames (Lee DeWyze album), and I'm sorry for not getting back to you sooner - the last couple of weeks have been really busy for me.

This was the first time that I've ever tried writing an article on an album, and I didn't really know how to approach it. So I appreciate all of your comments. I'm actually a lot happier with a fail and recommendations on how to make the article better, than I would have been had you passed it.

'''My apologies for the ridiculous length of my comments below. I knew that they were long, but was shocked when I clicked on the "Show preview" button and saw just how long. I've divided it into sections to make it at least a little more readable. No rush on getting back to me on all of this.'''

Lead

There are two removals that you made during your copy-edit that I don't necessarily agree with, and I'm hoping that you could explain them. The date and genre of an album seem like the kind of info that should be presented to a reader as soon as possible. So even though these are both contained in the infobox, and discussed in a little more detail later on in the lead, I'd still like to see them presented in the opening sentence as well. This is something that I've seen done in most other album articles (as well as most movie articles). I'm also unsure why you chose to remove "Undaunted by this setback" from the beginning of the second sentence of the second paragraph. DeWyze's optimism after being dropped is discussed and referenced in the "Background" section, and I feel like mentioning it in the lead is a good way to transition from the first sentence of that paragraph into the second sentence.

Your recommendation to remove or shorten the list of songwriters/producers in the lead is a good one. I'll probably remove all of them, since I don't know of anything that would make a certain few of them more notable than the others. I suppose that I could say something about how Drew Pearson co-wrote both of the singles or how Toby Gad was the only producer to work with DeWyze on both Frames and Live It Up, but this kind of info is probably a little too specific for the lead.

Could you give me your thoughts on the final paragraph of the lead (where the album's singles are discussed)? You said that you didn't like the way in which it was written.

Touring and Promotion

I completely get what you're saying about the Touring/Promotion sections. I knew that they were overkill as I was writing them, but had difficulty deciding for myself what was worth including and what wasn't. My thought process with the touring section was that I wanted to mention each individual artist that did a show with DeWyze. I didn't realize when I first set out that there would be so many. And I clearly got carried away with it. I don't really follow musician's tours closely, so I don't know what they're normally like, but it's always been my impression that an artist typically has one or two opening acts that tour with them regularly. Had that been the case here, then definitely, I would have just written a quick summary saying something along the lines of "DeWyze toured from [this date] to [this date] with [this group]", while only singling out a show if it was particularly significant - hence why I condensed his August shows with Serena Ryder and Toad the Wet Sprocket down to a single sentence.

Does Wikipedia have some kind of standard approach for how to write a touring section when almost every show has a different opening act? Personally, I still kind of want to mention each of these artists. I don't know whether or not this would fall under something like WP:FANCRUFT, but I do think that there's a potential audience that could be interested in this information. It's a little tricky for me to tell where the right balance would be between having enough information for people with a high interest in the topic, and not so much information that people with only a small interest won't be turned away. I've tried shortening the section, by removing dates and locations, and listing the various less-notable opening acts together. It's still pretty long, but it's at least quite a bit shorter than it was, and most of the text is now devoted to special concerts that were significant for some reason or another. Let me know what you think. I'm certainly open to more changes.

What are your thoughts on how I should go about fixing the Promotion section? Most of this information is, I think, on its own, relevant enough for inclusion. There's just so much of it though, which certainly makes it a mundane read. I could imagine a lot of people being interested in knowing that DeWyze did a concert with the Gateway for Cancer Research or that CBS Chicago has a video of him dedicating one of his songs to the victims of natural disasters, or that various websites offered songs from the album before the official release date. However, I can't imagine many people wanting to read this entire section. I thought about splitting it into two or three separate sections; one for television appearances and TV shows that have used DeWyze's songs, one for DeWyze's involvement with charities (not sure what I would have called this though, since I probably would have included the 2013 IP Summit here as well, which I don't think was a charity. "Special Causes" maybe?), and a "Release" section. Another thought that I had was that the charity work might be better suited to DeWyze's own article - it certainly should be mentioned there either way. However, I thought that since all of this has taken place during the same time that he's been promoting the album, it would probably be relevant here. Also, I feel like I've seen other articles about albums include this type of info.

One small thing that I've done is that I've removed some of the dates for the various events that DeWyze participated in, as well as the specific songs that he performed. I left all of the information on the first two events though, since it seems particularly significant that DeWyze premiered two of his songs a year before the album's release. I also decided to keep the date for the video of DeWyze dedicating the song "Don't Be Afraid" to disaster relief, but I'm not opposed to removing it.

For the early releases, I'm thinking that instead of specifically mentioning Pandora Radio, noisetrade.com, and Twitmusic, I could just have the sentence about Bilboard.com and follow it with a sentence like, "Over the following days, several more websites offered free previews of various songs." I'm also thinking about removing the sentence about Newbury Comics from that paragraph. Do these sound like good ideas?

I understand your viewpoint that too much focus is given to DeWyze's appearance on American Idol. I think that I remember reading some policy or guideline or another that said that the amount of coverage an article should give to a specific aspect of a topic should generally be determined by the amount of coverage that it received by the media. So, since I could find several articles providing a critical assessment of the performance (and could easily find at least a few more), it seemed like I should give some kind of mention to it in the article. I could take a few of these out though. Or I could just take all of them out. It's not that big of a deal to me. I have been thinking about creating an article for the song "Silver Lining"; would this kind of info be better suited there?

I definitely feel that the other TV appearances, as well as the TV shows that have used DeWyze's songs, should be mentioned here. The bit about the "The Ride" being played during a NASCAR race could probably be removed though. I was on the fence about including that in the first place, and only did so that I could ask about it during the GA review. I want to at least specify what year these episodes premiered in, but do you think that the exact dates are relevant?

Reception

As for the Reception section, I know this looks like a neutrality issue, but the truth is that this is really just an indication of what critics thought of the album. It wasn't exactly a big release, since it was with an indie label. So there weren't a lot of reviews to draw from. The few critics that did write reviews for the album though, were pretty much all positive. I've done an extensive search, and only ever found one review that was negative. If I remember correctly, it was for a college newspaper. I wasn't sure whether it met the reliability criteria or not, and was keeping it bookmarked while I weighed whether or not I should include it. I've since had to do a system restore on my computer, and lost the page. If you feel that it would be reliable though, then I can try to find it again.

I've added the review scores template to the "Critical reception" section. You also said that this section is "disorganized". How can I work on improving that?

Thanks again for all of the advice! :) --Jpcase (talk) 18:34, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

TOYPAJ Review
Hey there! Thanks for the review. I've responded to all your suggestions and shortened/deleted many sections. Comments: Thanks again and if there's anything else that needs work let me know! Thardin12 (talk) 20:06, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
 * The only reason I ever re-stated chart positions in the commercial performance section was to beef it up some. There’s very little commercial information readily available for a 12-year old album, surprisingly, so I used what I had. Nevertheless, I’ve merged the promotion section with commercial performance and deleted much of the “music video” tidbits (moved to those respective pages) and deleted a lot chart stuff.
 * Rephrased the “top of the tree” (which I’m sure was a direct quote, but I don’t have the magazine or scans available.

BC13 (Brokencyde debut EP) listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect BC13 (Brokencyde debut EP). Since you had some involvement with the BC13 (Brokencyde debut EP) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so.  Lazy Bastard  Guy  19:09, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:SCUM Manifesto
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:SCUM Manifesto. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

White Album move discussion
I responded to your argument on the page, but I'll also note here: May I point out that "[the official name] takes precedence over colloquial names" is contrary to our own WP:UCN and WP:OFFICIAL? Our own title guidelines say to use a common name over the official name. Dralwik&#124;Have a Chat 13:45, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Maybe free media
see here. Frietjes (talk) 19:02, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Prior to the Fire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Fulcrum (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) 08:54, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:RT (TV network)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:RT (TV network). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi
Even though I find your c/e to be anything but complete at Sherri Rasmussen I would atleast like to ask you to add the GOCE template to the talk page as you always should do to all articles that you have edited within the GOCE. Please do that from now on. --BabbaQ (talk) 22:25, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
 * That's not compulsory, just recommended. Nowhere do the GOCE's pages say, "you MUST add the template".  In fact, I rarely use it myself.  See WikiProject_Guild_of_Copy_Editors/How_to. Thanks, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 22:36, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I reverted a couple of your changes. First, I deleted the spaces around the em dahses. MOS:EMDASH says that no spaces are to be used with em dashes; if an editor has decided to use en dashes, that way, then they're set off with spaces, but not em dashes. Second, I relinked that "LAPD" at the beginning of that one graf. At that point in the article I hadn't used the acronym for at least a section; it's better to allow a reader online to refresh their memory through a mouseover rather than make them scroll up, IMO, even over a short distance. At least that is how I was taught. Otherwise, thanks. Daniel Case (talk) 01:31, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the help. Yes, I have thought about nominating it for GA at some point ... however I'd like to wait and see on how Lazarus's appeal develops. Daniel Case (talk) 01:49, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Mmm ... let me get back to you in the morning when my brain is sharper. Daniel Case (talk) 02:09, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

GA review
Hi. Would you care to review New York Dolls (album), which I've nominated for good article status? I'm hoping to nominate it for FAC soon after as well. If not, feel free to ignore this message, and cheers! Dan56 (talk) 10:33, 14 April 2014 (UTC)