User talk:Zephyrad

The Beatles
--kingboyk 21:03, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

You are right
Thank you for your comments, Zephyrad. This is my first debate at Wikipedia and, frankly, I am surprised by the mob rule and closed-mindedness! I see you are a writer—it does appear those who have to write or edit for a living believe in the lowercase definite article and the uneducated do not, if I were forced to make a generalization. I love your oil analogy. Similarly, though it is not as good an analogy, remember the spam-free internet, before the mob got in?—Jack Yan 23:45, 22 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Zephyrad, thanks for popping by and leaving a comment on my talk page. I got pretty frustrated with the whole thing and only came in today after spotting something on Wiki that was incorrect. Mark was rather negative in his comment below to you, wasn't he? He seemed to think I was rude. Oh well, people will read in whatever they like. Still gets me that the capitalization brigade never had the sense just to Google some newspapers!—Jack Yan 12:05, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Maintenance tags
The thing with some maintenance tags (in films at least) goes like this: some editors go through a huge number of articles looking for what may be missing (or going wrong) and tagging them for it. When a maintenance tag is added, the article appears in a certain maintenance category (like Category:Articles that need a film infobox). Then a number of members organize a campain for cleaning the category by adding the missing item or doing whatever task is needed (see WikiProject Films). Of course some tasks have a huge backlog... I hope this gives you an idea. Cheers! Hoverfish Talk 08:46, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, sorry to leave it unclear. It's about you expressed wish (which I also often share) in Talk:Blue Denim. Hoverfish Talk 09:01, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

It is now the Beatles
In case you are not watching the page, I have now formalised the policy to reflect the proper way of refering to the band. The announcement is here, and the wording is on the main page. Your help in applying this policy to the articles would be appreciated. LessHeard vanU 15:05, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I am delivering the above message to all the concerned editors. I have noted your comments on talkpages. Please do not bother thanking me for my efforts, although I seriously doubt such a consideration would ever have entered your mind, as I wish to interact with you as little as possible. LessHeard vanU 15:20, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Hamilton Stands (deletion review)
Hi, yes, it looks like you've submitted it correctly. (There were very few real problems, but some trolls have blown it out of proportion, but this is how Wikipedia works).--Konstable 11:40, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Wish I could see the original article. But yeah--sometimes you just have to work through the regulations enforced by those who spend a lot of time here. --Lukobe 20:44, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Glad to help. --Lukobe 16:54, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 19:32, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:PeteBest1.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:PeteBest1.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 07:46, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Paul Beaver ("addition lacks references"?!)
I got tired of writing something similar to "removing infantile vandalism" as an explanation for the revert and got a little more "creative" on this and a similar entry on the 1970s article because the vandal came up with a more "unique" edit than just simply adding "poop" somewhere in an article! Just trying to make it different today! CZmarlin 05:35, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Apple Boutique
That's not punctuation, it's magic! :) --kingboyk 23:15, 25 July 2007 (UTC) (nice edit)

Ascot Sound Studios
Hi. I don't know if you saw my reply or not, but the bottom line is that if you disagree with an edit of mine feel free to revert it, or open it up to further discussion :) (Bold, revert, discuss). Cheers. --kingboyk 21:35, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I Apologize
I feel so embarrassed for everytime I inserted the album cover I did not notice the difference. I appreciate the heads up and yes I strongly understand the vandalism polocies which makes me feel worse. Thank you for the good Wiki work. --Apologies2all 13:41, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Raider Snowmobile
A template has been added to the article Raider Snowmobile, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with db-author. B. Wolterding 17:54, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 18:47, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

John S. Park Elementary School
Hi Zephyrad. I've replied on your comment at the talk page of 12.32.94.66. - Face 20:07, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Kleinsigning.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Kleinsigning.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:37, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Remo Four
Hi Zephyrad, just a quick "hello" and thank you for the (very quick) formatting of the discography I added last night. I'll try to get dates, etc for the band's original releases. Best wishes, Weydonian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Weydonian (talk • contribs) 17:13, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Monkee
A tag has been placed on Monkee requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on |the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Toddst1 (talk) 14:13, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: RE: The Beatles: An Illustrated Record
I tag articles accordingly, regardless of whether it is in the writing process. If you feel that you have good sources, you can remove the tag. Other than general items, specific things I think require a reference: Thanks. &lt;3 bunny  00:17, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * "The Beatles: An Illustrated Record is a 1975 book by music journalists Roy Carr and Tony Tyler, published by Harmony Books. Updated editions were published in 1978 and 1981."
 * The first sentence is introductory (obviously), but has no reference as to prove its authors and updated version publications.
 * "Later editions deleted this portion, stating only that they were of generally poor sound quality, and of interest 'only to the most die-hard Beatlemaniacs.'"
 * Direct quote, needs reference.
 * "Some of us simply know things, without having the appropriate references right there handy" constitutes WP:OR, which is not appropriate. As for what types of reference, anything that satisfies WP:RS would suffice. I'm not saying I don't believe you, I'm just saying you don't have reliable secondary sources to back it up. If someone is going to ask you "where did you find this information", "I just know it" wouldn't suffice as an answer. And you know, I'd expand the article, but I'm not particularly knowing of the subject, so I tag it, hoping others who have the knowledge - you, for example, might find the sources and cite them. I'm not trying to be provocative or offensive; I'm merely trying to say that this page lacks WP:RS and some should be added. &lt;3  bunny  01:52, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Pleasant Valley Sunday, was selected for DYK!
Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid (talk) 17:01, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Re:Second class citizenry
There is absolutely no doubt that people from the lower castes are discriminated against by various sections of the Indian society, but my point was that citizenship is granted by the state (state and Union governments) and in that respect people from the lower castes are equal, at least theoretically. Segregation and apartheid were state sanctioned, to my knowledge. In fact, there are well established affirmative action programs sponsored by the state in India, although their effectiveness is a matter of debate. Please see Reservation in India.

But make no mistake, millions of lower caste Hindus continue to face discrimination (along with minority religions and women) even as India's Chief Justice is from the lower caste and Prime Minister is a Sikh among other examples of egalitarianism. My textbooks in India did not mention much abt British involvement in the caste system. So, I really dont know much abt that. But the caste system was officially only abolished when the Constitution of India came into force, after British occupation had ended. Thanks.I am invariant under co-ordinate transformations (talk) 17:17, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Reply on my talk page
Hi Zephyrad. I left a detailed response on my talk page, mostly regarding how I interpreted the definite-article debate on "The Beatles" vs. "the Beatles". I don't have time to take care of the admin actions on the various page moves you pointed out, but if they still need attention later when I do have time, I'll see what I can do. Thanks. &mdash; KieferSkunk (talk) &mdash; 00:28, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

The Beatles moves
Thanks Let me say first off, that I have an aesthetic preference for "the Beatles," so I have not moved anything as a matter of trying to unilaterally impose my own preference. Secondly, I took a look at the link you gave - and I hope you can appreciate this - I do not know that I have the time or energy to read all of these posts. I looked for a final consensus and did not immediately see one. Are you trying to say that there is some official preference for "With the Beatles?" What again was the rationale for that? Is that not contrary to similar policy on Wikipedia? Thanks so much for your time. -Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:58, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay Well, I certainly won't be offended if anyone moves the pages - yourself included. That having been said, it seems like this indicates an arbitrary and inconsistent capitalization including resorting to capitalization used by "official" sources (e.g. the title card of "The Birth of the Beatles" has a lower-case "the" so that article should be lower case, whereas "A Day with The Beatles" uses caps, so it should be caps.) This is directly contradictory to Trademarks which reads "Follow standard English text formatting and capitalization rules even if the trademark owner considers nonstandard formatting 'official'" and follows with examples. Regardless of what is decided by a WikiProject, those rules supercede, do they not? Now, it is my understanding that normative English includes capitalization of "the" in Beatles since it is a proper name. Again, that's not my personal preference, but it's my understanding of how things are to be done. This is why I asked "Is that not contrary to similar policy on Wikipedia?" and I feel like I need to reiterate that question again.


 * I realize that the discussion about capitalization was long, drawn-out, etc. before. I don't particularly care to get into the middle of it, since, to the best of my knowledge, it is irrelevant anyway. Either all "the"s should be capitalized or none of them should (barring obvious examples such as the beginning of a sentence.) Also, if there was not actual consensus reached (and it appears there wasn't from your response) I don't see how me reading all of it is in any way germane. -Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:27, 13 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks Your last post really clarified your attitude, but it didn't exactly answer my questions. I appreciate your note and the good-will behind it. -Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:29, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

apologies
Regarding your comment on my talk page: it definitely looks like I made a mistake. I apologize; I'm usually more careful. Please forgive me. Samboha (talk) 04:57, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

You removed a cited, published statement
You removed a statement published on the CD liner for Wonderwall Music. That was Derek Taylor, quoting George Harrison. You replaced it by an uncited statement which contradicts it. See the Wonderwall page discussion.

Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 23:41, 11 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Some good points you made, followed up on the Wonderwall Music Discussion. Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 01:58, 12 May 2008 (UTC)


 * All I was trying to do was replace an old, apparently incorrect quote, with a better one. The fact that you are a recording engineer doesn't mitigate the fact that you removed a published source and replaced with your opinion: Original Research.

''Editor's note: The following basically reads like sour grapes. The author attempts to put words in my mouth ("easy to record", "know important sound engineers"), counters claims of original research with... gee, more original research ("the recording engineer told me"), and whines about alleged personal attacks, while the author makes plenty of his own ("your Discussion statement... is wrong", "original research that is wrong", "you overstep yourself", "you assume you know more than anyone else", "lay off people who are trying to ask honest questions"). "No need to be rude" is answered with rudeness. Bear this in mind.'' Zephyrad (talk) 05:58, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, of course I've listened to the Wonderwall LP and CD, I used to know the recording by heart. There's no need to be rude. The reason I said in the Discussion that a sitar is difficult to record is that I OWN a sitar and was recorded playing it. The recording engineer told me it was considered to be a very difficult challenge. Your Discussion statement, that it's easy to record, from what I know, as a player, is wrong. Most sitar recordings are very poor. You back up your opinions with original research, and not only that, but original research that is wrong. I'm not saying that you are wrong that the Indian Wonderwall recording was done in stereo — in fact, I now suspect you are right. I am saying that you overstep yourself when you assume you know more than anyone else, in every area. Since you know important sound engineers who have expressed an opinion on this, why not get them to provide you with independent, reliable sources for your Wonderwall opinions. And lay off people who are trying to ask honest questions without being subjected to personal attack. Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 08:12, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Second-class citizen
Why have you removed referenced information about Latvia, coming from a reliable source - Council of Europe? 213.175.125.23 (talk) 06:50, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I cannot say I was glad to get a reference to a discussion page containing 14 sections as answer. If you mean your KEEP THE LIST LIMITED TO EXAMPLES FROM THE PAST. Current issues really belong on a current-events page from section 12 - article isn't called "SCC in past", and definition in its beginning also isn't limited with the past.
 * In some cases when you have reverted additions it could be understood - though I'd prefer first to ask for sources qualifying something as SCC. In this case, still, added information is provided with a reliable source (unlike many phrases which you don't erase, interestingly) using the term SCC.
 * Summary: according to WP:NPOV, it's enough to give references to who had evaluated whom as SCC (sometimes "when" is also important). Of course we shouldn't say whether somebody "really" are/were SCC. 213.175.125.23 (talk) 17:53, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Opinion from WP:3
Greetings. I've reviewed the article, it's talk page, and the talk page of the people involved in this dispute. First let me make sure I understand the dispute.

This dispute is over the inclusion of the following text to the 3rd paragraph: "; status of Latvian non-citizens was described as making 'people concerned feel like “second-class citizens”' by CoE in 2007."

I reviewed the article and its talk page. I note with interest the argument surrounding, and the eventual decision to remove "the list" from this page. This indicates to me a consensus to try to aviod situations such as the one you find yourselves in today by limiting the scope of the article and excluding any non-historic examples. The examples currently in the article are all long-term, globally historic examples. I doubt that anyone would try to equate the current situation in Latvia to African apartheid or American segregation. As such, my opinion is that the information on Latvia does not belong on this page. Appropriate places for this information include the article on Latvia, which oddly makes no mention of this situation. I hope this opinion helps. Livitup (talk) 15:31, 11 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi, I was not aware I was in a dispute. It sounds to me like you read the situation concerning the Latvia information exactly. I was hoping the examples of this and that group on the talk page (over several years) would impress upon this other editor that the add wasn't unique, and would not strengthen the article, references or no references. I don't mind that you weighed in; thanks for doing so. Zephyrad (talk) 16:04, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I get the feeling that often one person lists a dispute at WP:3 without informing the other side, which is fine, since it's a very informal resolution process. I normally would have responded on the talk page of the lister (if not the article talk page), but since the lister was an IP I decided to use your talk page... hope you don't mind.  I did leave a comment at the IP's talk page referring them to your page.  Glad I helped!  Livitup (talk) 16:10, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I can live with it... and no, I didn't know that anyone had gone to WP:3 until your message this morning. (If I even knew about that wing of Wikiresolutions, I forgot about it. Good to know though.) Zephyrad (talk) 23:30, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

incorrect capitalisation is not a minor problem
Please take a look at Talk:The_Beatles Thanks, Espoo (talk) 19:35, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents
A thread is currently active at WP:AN/I and it is regarding you. Please offer your input if you feel needed. :)  &lt;3  Tinkleheimer   TALK!!  06:30, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Sweet Lemons
The lady in question then lived in Staten Island, New York. Several years later, she moved to Boulder, Colorado, which is where she lived the last time I was in touch with her. Kostaki mou (talk) 00:59, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Planet of the Apes
Zephyrad--Your knowledge of Planet of the Apes needs some brush-up. Central City has never been mentioned as having any connection whatsoever to the Planet of the Apes films or their novelizations, and it most definitely is not the human city that became the Forbidden City. Central City is from the TV series--it's the West Coast capital city for the ape civilization, and is where Zaius and Urko reside. The Forbidden City is the remains of either San Diego or San Francisco, depending on which POTA reference work one believes (most recently, it was identified as San Diego in Revolution on the Planet of the Apes), and the rebellion takes place at the Ape Management Complex's Command Post. And Gov. Breck, as stated in the fifth film, is the governor of California. Please stop erroneously adding "Central City" to the entries related to the films, as your information is inaccurate.. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.210.59 (talk) 15:50, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I received your messages, and it's obvious you didn't read mine. My point was that the novelizations do NOT indicate the films take place in Central City. They simply do not. Central City is never mentioned in any of the film novelizations, period. The only place that name appears is in the TV series and its novelizations, NOT in the films or their novelizations. There has never been ANY source ever published that identifies the films as taking place in Central City, and if you consulted your novelizations again, you'd see that to be true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.210.59 (talk) 22:43, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

In response to your most recent note: The only point of yours that needed a reply (and, hence, the only one I replied to) was your claim that the film novelizations cite Central City as the setting of the films. Since that isn't true, everything else is moot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.210.59 (talk) 23:24, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

The bottom line--because I'm not trying to fight with you, but rather point out the inaccuracy of your point--is that this statement "The book adaptations of the movies, not to mention the graphic novel adaptations, say Central City" is simply false. None of the novels or comics based on the films have ever identified the film setting as being Central City. The only place Central City has ever been used has been in the TV series and the novelizations and comics based on that version of Planet of the Apes. Central City is the TV series' version of Ape City. That's a matter of fact--if you watch the series, you'll see it to be true, as it's mentioned in just about every episode. And if you re-read the Marvel Comics adaptations and novelizations, you'll find no mention of Central City. Your other point--about my posting history--is irrelevant since this isn't personal about either of us. It's about you making incorrect changes to the Planet of the Apes entries, and my explaining to you that they are, in fact, in error. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.210.59 (talk) 23:30, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Dude...why are you making this so personal? I was simply discussing with you the fact that your edits were incorrect. Fine, if you're going to be so confrontational about it, consider this my last comment on the subject, especially since you have yet to actually address the point of the conversation, which is that Central City does not feature in the films or their novelizations, and if you don't believe me, you have only to look it up yourself to find out. Good day to you, sir. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.210.59 (talk) 01:15, 23 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I find it really funny that you say that, considering many of your edits were vandalism, and most recently, you created a non-approved bot who's only purpose was to revert articles which you edited back to your own version, which, of course, is strictly prohibited here.— Dæ dαlusContribs /Improve 08:50, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note - This reply is to the sockpuppet operating from the IP address listed above, not you, Zephy.— Dæ dαlusContribs /Improve 02:24, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Re:Re:67.244.75.51
I have filed an WP:AIV report. Thanks for your concerns. Cheers, Ṝ ed  M arkV iolinist Drop me a line 04:29, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I have a feeling they are the same. You may want to write out a suspected sock puppets case, considering you know more about the topic than I do. Cheers, Ṝ ed  M arkV iolinist Drop me a line 04:40, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Jason Nesmith
Thank you for your note. This wasn't really the focus of my concern here but I have gone ahead and tracked down a New York Times article, and others, that refer to Jason (#3) as Michael's son. --Arxiloxos (talk) 00:31, 22 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks again, Zephyrad. Honestly, I got into this only because I ran across, and tried to fix, some links for "Jason Nesmith" that had been misdirected to Jason Nesmith (wrestler) when they were meant for either Jason NeSmith (Casper) or Jason Nesmith son-of-Mike-and-Nurit.  (I was actually looking at the article for the great "lost" new wave band Pylon when I got dragged into this.)  It's evident you're a qualified Monkee-ologist, which I would not claim to be, so what do you think of the following additional sources for Jason's parentage?  Also, do you think there is enough sourceable material in existence to justify a little article about Jason-son-of-Mike that would support his WP:notability independent of his parentage?  He does have a listing at Allmusic.com, as does his old band Nancy Boy and several of his other efforts.


 * A 1994 New York Times article about Donovan Leitch and the band Nancy Boy, identifying Jason Nesmith as "the son of Mike Nesmith, formerly of the Monkees."  This should be sufficient, but I also found:
 * The article from the Boston Globe that you also mentioned, in which the reporter states that Nurit had Michael's child, and adds a direct quote from Nurit referring to Jason Nesmith as her son.  It's my understanding, subject to being advised otherwise by someone more experienced, that this source is deemed reliable pursuant to Biographies_of_living_persons:  "Some newspapers host interactive columns that they call blogs, and these may be acceptable as sources so long as the writers are professionals and the blog is subject to the newspaper's full editorial control."
 * Official publicity for Jason Nesmith's album Portrait, which includes the following: "And yes, he is the son of Michael Nesmith. But don’t tell anybody."
 * I also found a published book on Google directly identifying him as the son of both Mike and Nurit.    I am uncertain about the provenance of the publisher of this book, however, so its credentials under WP:BLP may be less clear than the previous ones.

--Arxiloxos (talk) 00:11, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

The Turtles
The content I removed from the article were unsourced statements and POV. Can you source all these statements and songwriting credits? You re-added unsourced fan cruft. Please don't revert my edits if you can't find documentation of these statements as this is written as an unsourced magazine article. Mjpresson (talk) 08:33, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Lennon Rock N Roll Article
of course I wrote most of the original article in the first place Hotcop2 (talk) 02:13, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

what i meant by original is the one you keep reverting to. now that there is a page for "roots" why do we need "roots" info on rock n roll? Hotcop2 (talk) 00:58, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Kenwood, St. George's Hill
I think you have something to say, do you not?--andreasegde (talk) 16:20, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch. Zephyrad (talk) 20:30, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Northern Songs
What was the article title, author of the article, and pages the article was on? So that we can get rid of those fact tags? hbdragon88 (talk) 19:18, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

WP:CIVIL
When you deleted tags which I correctly place in the article Automatic double tracking. you referred to them as"ridiculous" in your edit summary. Please be aware that this can be construed as a personal attack. Please also be aware that the removal of the tags can be considered disruptive editing. R ad io pa th y  •talk•  02:08, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * While referring to the tags as ridiculous might not have been terribly kind, I don't see how it was INCIVIL. - Sinneed (talk) 09:35, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Flophouses
You can set the criteria for what counts as a "notable" mention of flophouses. But as it is, the article is much too inclusive. DS (talk) 04:35, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Zephyrad! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 3 of the articles that you created  are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the list:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 04:39, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Johnny Hutchinson -
 * 2) Kenneth Ascher -
 * 3) Marilyn Wilson-Rutherford -

Beatles RfC
Hello, this message is to inform you that there is currently a public poll here, to determine whether to capitalize the definite article ("the") when mentioning the band " THE BEATLES " mid-sentence. As you've previously participated either here, here, here, or here, your input would be appreciated. Thank you for your time. ~ GabeMc  (talk 23:50, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bicentennial Minutes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Don Bowman (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) 09:07, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Harmon R. Whittle for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Harmon R. Whittle is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Harmon R. Whittle until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 21:35, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Global account
Hi Zephyrad! As a Steward I'm involved in the upcoming unification of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see m:Single User Login finalisation announcement). By looking at your account, I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on Special:MergeAccount and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 01:33, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Mighty Marvel Comics Strength and Fitness Book, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Weightlifting. 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, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 4
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Body Snatcher, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Ken Harvey and Ian Martin. 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) 11:07, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Shrink ray, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ultrasonic. 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) 10:32, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I didn't reply to you
Hi there. I was just scanning through a "what links here" and found a long message from you on an archived version of my user talk page. It was a very long time ago, but I don't appear to have replied either there or here, and I'd prefer to rectify that now rather than quibble about the length of time that has passed.

Firstly, then, I'm sorry that I apparently didn't reply. At the time you wrote I was in the first year of a new career, and very busy; I was also somewhat disillusioned with Wikipedia and semi-retired. The chances are I simply archived that talk page without reading it.

Thank you for the personal compliments. I understand and accept why you chose not to join the WikiProject. I also share some of your frustrations; the "T vs t" debate makes me sad to this day. We lost some good editors because of it.

I hope you are well, and I hope you don't mind me writing to you 10 years later. I hope you agree that "better late than never" applies :). Warm regards, --kingboyk (talk) 00:16, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:BellRecord3.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:BellRecord3.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text  below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

''' This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. ''' Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Meeno Peluce


The article Meeno Peluce has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Non notable former child actor who never had any significant lead roles. Yes, his half-sister is notable, but notability is not inherited."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. EnPassant♟♙ (talk) 17:52, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Meeno Peluce for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Meeno Peluce is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Meeno Peluce until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. EnPassant♟♙ (talk) 21:41, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of John London


The article John London has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Old, unsourced article"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 01:48, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of John London for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John London is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/John London until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 03:24, 12 March 2023 (UTC)