User talk:Wickethewok/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click here to leave a new message

I will respond to messages left on my talk page here. If I leave a message on your talk page, please respond there. This prevents fractured discussions.

Archived[edit]

  • Last archived on April 6, 2007. Please put any comments on the current talk page.

Dance music[edit]

Would you mind if I complain a bit, hopefully for the last time? I'm almost sure that if I had posted that same comment at talk:dance music, immediately a couple of stalkers would have come to insult. One of the reasons that prompt ppl like me to leave... Anw, good work.--Doktor Who 23:47, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

just delete the link[edit]

I am not sure what your personal beef is with The Filthy Truth mailing list, but whether you like it or not, it does exist. You may have won your own argument about whether it deserves its own Wiki Entry, an argument is easy to win when you are the judge and jury as well. However, if other wiki articles point to that wiki entry and you feel you must continue your purge, then simply delete the link, not the fact. You raised the argument that nothing pointed to The Filthy Truth, hardly surprising if you go around deleting them. Looking at your list of "contributions"...if that is the right world for deletions...I cannot imagine you know a great deal about the computer games industry. Why you have decided to appoint yourself to this role is very puzzling to say the least. I don't really care two hoots if the Wiki page for TFT is restored, what bothers me is that the contents of wikipedia is being edited and deleted by people who don't understand the importance of an article. ACarPark 09:25, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • I am not "the judge and jury". I merely nominated it for deletion. My assessment was supported by many other editors and so the closing admin deleted it. If you wish to apply for deletion review, you may do so at WP:DRV. I have nominated hundreds of articles for deletion, so its not like I'm singling out "TFT". I assure you I have nothing personal against "TFT", it just didn't meet Wikipedia guidelines. Wickethewok 19:24, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Hi wickethewok - apologies for not following proper protocol. I am curious about getting the nettime article reinstated and what type of information is needed as proof of notability. It has been referenced in numerous print articles, academice papers, etc. I believe it is considered one of the legendary communities for Europe, sort of similar to the WELL in the USA. It is rumored to be the inspiration behind Bruce Sterlings "Holy Fire" and has played a large role in developing critical net culture. I guess it seems like the article would need to be expanded and not deleted. hope you can help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Diastar (talk • contribs)

  • If you have reliable sources specifically about the source (not just mentioned), you can simply re-write the article, you don't need to go to DRV. Wickethewok 23:44, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yahoo yahoo boys is not a neologism[edit]

The reason why is because "Yahoo-yahoo boys" was deleted - You deleted it on November 8, 2006.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Undelete/Yahoo-yahoo_boys

"Yahoo-yahoo boys" (exp PROD: "Unreferenced, unlinked, probable neologism.") (Restore)"

I should also send the same message to the person who added the PROD.

WhisperToMe 03:11, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help I dunno how to delete this article[edit]

I have started moving stuff with "gamecruft" to gaming wikis. But I have trouble deleting them. Such as Club Penguin Locations I moved it and taged it but nothing happened. --Cs california 17:36, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • You've done everything correctly, you just need to wait for some more people to add their opinions. Once a consesus has been reached, an administrator will close the AFD as either keep or delete. Wickethewok 19:31, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Orb is FAC[edit]

Congratulations, the article is outstanding; it was a pleasure to support. Ceoil 20:13, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removed your album art for Out There and Back[edit]

Hi. I replaced your album art for Paul van Dyk's Out There and Back w/ a more clear version I scanned in myself. Just a heads up. Paerra 05:43, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

raindrops[edit]

i really dug Amidst the Raindrops, do you have a copy that isnt an .ogg file?

penelopeorange@gmail.com

Genmay[edit]

please dont delete relevant articles to wikipedia about internet culture

in ref: genmay—Preceding unsigned comment added by Moorbo (talk • contribs)

ILS article[edit]

ILS Page

I have my concerns over your article on Ils, specifically that many of the points are not backed up with citations, and that the whole article reads a bit like an advertisement for the individual: you are clearly a fan, and this shows in the positive bias that is apparent. Please see the page itself & update so that it can remain on Wikipedia. Leftblank 09:41, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • I am not clearly a fan of Ils. I merely created the article stub and most of the article information was by other editors. Anyways, I created it again with actual sources. Unfortunately, since you tagged it with a speedy deletion tag, I was not able to update it. If you in fact want people to improve articles, I suggest not doing this in the future. If you still think it lacks claims of notability, you are perfectly welcome to AFD it. Wickethewok 17:31, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with Gershchenkron effect[edit]

I'm not sure how to deal with this situation with the article Gershchenkron effect. The article title is a misspelling, but the fellow working on it seems to have some grasp of the topic, though he's obviously not neutral and his English is poor. He seems to like getting into arguments, and his choice of words (e.g. "abomination") on the talk page is inappropriate. Technically, the article should be deleted, but I'm hesitant to tag it for deletion -- mainly because the user seems to be limiting his edits right now to this particular article, which somewhat defends the rest of Wikipedia from his edits. Any help you can offer is greatly appreciated. --SueHay 02:52, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I think he went away, at least for now. --SueHay 15:31, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, he does seem defensive and possessive of his edits. He has a bunch of stuff on his talk page about people deleting his work and subsequently stolen for use as term papers (wtf?). Hopefully someone who knows some economics will be able to merge the two Gerschenkron or whatever articles, as there is probably some useful stuff there. He does appear to be trying to improve his version and making it more encyclopedic though. Anyways, I left him a message. Wickethewok 16:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks for your help! --SueHay 03:25, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The London Exchange[edit]

The London Exchange is not nonsense, it is a parody band that is actually rather popular in this town. Many people have been to our shows. We have a myspace and it is completely legit. myspace.com/thelondonexchange Check it if you don't believe me. I felt that we needed a wikipedia page because we are getting signed to a label soon (within a week). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Outcesticide121 (talk • contribs) 03:49, 6 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

  • Articles need sources and bands specifically should meet WP:BAND. Also Wikipedia guidelines suggests you don't write about things associated with yourself, such as your band. Wickethewok 03:50, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • well if that's your attitude, than maybe you should delete the Spinal Tap wikipedia page. it's a fictional "nonsense" band. And they were obscure. And their only reliable source was a movie, as is the same with The London Exchange. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Outcesticide121 (talk • contribs)
  • The film Spinal Tap has been written about by countless sources, including major reviews, books, newspapers, etc... Your band has not been. Wickethewok 04:05, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Local Newspapers have written about us, saying we are "the next Weird Al Yankovics".--Outcesticide121 04:08, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you can provide proper citation to them, you can bring them up at WP:DRV to have the article undeleted. Wickethewok 04:16, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • How the hell am I supposed to provide citation to an obscure, local rock magazine? How stupid of you to even suggest such a thing.
  • You could say what magazine it is for starters. By citation I mean say like what magazine, what page #, what date it was published. I also suggest you refrain from name-calling, it really doesn't help your case. Wickethewok 09:31, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well considering I'm having to go through all this trouble to make it seem like this band actually happened, I think I have the right to be pretty frustrated right now. And the magazine is The Memphis Flyer, page 12, March 4th, 2006. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Outcesticide121 (talk • contribs)
  • If you like, I can put this on deletion review for you, though I offer no guarantees as to whether other editors will agree with your assertion that the band is notable. I suggest you check out WP:BAND to see the notability criteria for bands/musicians. I'm sure you understand why we can't just have articles for every band with a Myspace page. If you want somewhere with less strict requirements for notability, I suggest Music wikia or everything2.com . I still suggest that you don't write about yourself or people associated with you on Wikipedia however, as this is a conflict of interest. Wickethewok 19:45, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • When I wrote the page I made sure to make it as neutral as possible, stating all facts and not one opinion. And I'm not saying we should have a wiki page just cause we have a myspace. I decided to make one due to the fact that some people have both jokingly and seriously said "You guys should make a wikipedia for it in case you guys ever get big.
  • Well, we usually don't have articles on things until they actually become "big". When you make it big, I'm sure one of your fans will write up a bio for you. Wickethewok 21:11, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have seen bands featured on this website that are not only obscure beyond any shadow of a doubt, but also are just terrible bands all together.
  • Then I suggest you nominate those band's articles for deletion. Note that whether a band is good or bad does not have to do anything with whether there is an article about them or not. Wickethewok 21:50, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I realize that. It just further states how obscure and unworthy they are of being on here.

please restore[edit]

He is expected to debut in the next 3 years, please put his page back. I guarantee you will feel satisfaction knowing you played a part in the history of him.

  • Please don't create articles about yourself. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, so the article can be recreated whenever sources are available. Wickethewok 03:51, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

also, who are you to determine that it is considered nonsense? all of it was factual.

  • While your info may be true, information on Wikipedia must be verifiable through reliable sources, such as newspapers, books, or news websites. Otherwise, we have no way of knowing what information added is true. Wickethewok 03:56, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So if I were to contact him and quote his words, that would be ok? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skids927 (talk • contribs)

  • No, it would not be due to policies regarding original research. This information is still not verifiable. All information on Wikipedia must have been previously published. Wickethewok 04:05, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Omid Habibinia[edit]

...got created again. I don't know if you wish to follow up on your blocking threat or not.

Also, may I suggest you change the warning template you left him? User talk:Omid2007. There has to be a more targetted warning available than "vandalism"... --kingboyk 23:08, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • He has had history of recreating the article through multiple accounts and has been told with the Vanity/COI template that his autobiography stuff is inappropriate, so I'm pretty sure he realizes the reason why he's being warned and the article deleted. Wickethewok 04:41, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: the recreation of The London Exchange[edit]

This fellow Outcesticide121 is claiming that you said or implied that recreation of his article was ok, that he had a reasonable claim to notability. Rereading the long exchange the two of you had, I see no such statement on your part. However, he is insistant, and I am growing frustrated. How many times has this article been speedied? You left three messages on his talk page in regards to it. Is it now on its fourth recreation? ---Charles 00:25, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's been deleted 4 times. I'm now considering whether to block or not; I'd prefer not to but I suppose it will have to be done if he posts it again. --kingboyk 00:32, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I took care of it. --kingboyk 01:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I tried to discourage him from recreating it unless he had reliable sources, in which case I tried to convey to him that he take it to DRV. In any case, thanks guys for watching out for my talk page stuff! I haven't been able to be as active and do in depth stuff as much as I would have liked recently. School stuff almost done with for the semester... Wickethewok 04:41, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:OrbOrganic.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:OrbOrganic.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 00:28, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you delete this page[edit]

Can you delete List of Bomberman Hero Levels for me? I tagged it proposed for deletion and the time past. If there is a easy way to nominate stuff for deletion please leave the directions on my talk page. The directions on the help page dont help at all. --Cs california 23:30, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks --Cs california

Bob Ricci[edit]

I was the reason the original article of Bob Ricci got deleted because I copy/pasted his text from his Myspace page and it was promotional text. I explained this in the deletion proposal article and the admin told me to make a new article and post objective info only. I did so and now you're marking this one for deletion also. There's no more or less info or "sources" on most of the people listed in the "Parody musicians" category on Wikipedia, so I'm not sure why you're singling out Bob Ricci for deletion. If you google "Bob Ricci" you'll come up with over 30,000 links going back to him. Video sites, lyric sites, articles, videos posted on HUGE novelty sites, etc... There must be over 30 home-made videos to his "She Blocked Me" song alone on Youtube. He's even on iTunes. I'm not sure exactly what the reason is you marked this for deletion, especially since there's no sources listed in the other articles of artists like him such as Luke Ski, Will Powers, Paul Shanklin, etc.. I'd say more than half of the names on that category list don't have sources. The last admin told me that the article was subjective and needed to be re-written objectively. I've done that, and plan to add more to it when I can.

Please let me know what I need to do to keep the listing up. Ther's a billion links and references I can point to out there on google, but what do you need to keep the article up?

SSMatt 17:04, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • You need to add reliable sources that show the subject meets WP:BAND. Check out WP:RS for a better definition of a reliable source. In this case, professional album reviews or music magazine articles would be what you need to cite in the article. Wickethewok 20:50, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • So what you're saying is it doesn't matter how huge they are, and how much of a presense or fanbase they have, they just have to "play the game" and get a professional review that stays stagnant online? It doesn't matter how accomplished they are on their own? That's kind of ridiculous, don't you think? You have articles like the "numa numa video", which "She Blocked Me" was probably just as popular, and you probably wouldn't mark that for deletion. Plus you completely ignored the part where I said that more than half of the entries in the category have NO sources. Are you saying none of them should be on wikipedia? And if they are, why are you singling out the article I wrote? It's very frustrating that you're giving me a hard time about it and ignoring everything else I've said. I know you deal with this stuff all day long and I'm not trying to be difficult, but I think I'm being pretty reasonable here. SSMatt 02:46, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Stuff like Numa Numa, for example, has had articles written about it in the NY Times. If this guy is that popular, surely a couple local papers or reliable online news sites wrote something about it? I will check out the similar articles you mentioned, but note that having bad articles isn't a good reason for having more bad articles. I assure you that I'm not singling you or this article out. Wickethewok 02:53, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you could please just check out some of the stuff I linked I'd appriciate it. I mean... I could try to pull up a newspaper article (I'm sure they exist) or list a station that he was played on or whatever, but I don't have easy access to that info. He was played several times and is still played in rotation on Dr. Demento (Search "Bob Ricci" there for a list of airdates of his songs), which is a radio program syndicated to over 500 radio stations across the country and has been on the air for over 20 years. Is that a good source? I read on the WP Band page that radio syndication and charting counts as a source. I know he's also charted a few times on that show. And I know he's charted on various other stations including Canadian and Australian ones.. but again.. this is old news and isn't available online as a source. This site has a small accumulation of radio show broadcasts of his songs as well. I'm just a fan trying to get this page back up that we've had for years and all of a sudden had deleted on us due to admittedly a mistake on my part. Before the origial deletion we had all accumulated some great info, and as it is we already have to start from scratch. Just click the google search link I gave you at least and see that those 30,000 links that go back to him are for the most part ALL linking back to the same guy. He is pretty big on the internet whether major publications wrote about him or not.. and I'm sure they have, I just don't have that info. I can only go with what google gives me.

    Also, under Song Notability, one of the criterean is that it has been digitally downloaded a large number of times. The "She Blocked Me" Flash Video was downloaded over 30 million times. It was on the front page of ebaum's world which is proof enough that within a few days time it was downloaded a few million times if you're familliar at all with the type of traffic they get. (The counters on Ebaum's World have just been added recently, so the 19k hit number it's showing is just from the past few months they've added in the counters. I'm sure if you're familliar with the site you'd know that new content is added to the front page, and there's no way anything could be on the front page of that site for even an hour and have less than 19k hits). But even aside from that; 310,000+ views on this site... it's on a ton of other sites like these, but a lot of them don't have counters. But the point is, sites like these don't add content unless they generate hits, and the fact that this video is on almost ALL of these types of sites shows the popularity. Google it though and you'll see that too. It was also the number 1 most popular flash video on Albino Blacksheep for years (currently, it's still #4), which is another very popular flash video site. This video has even been converted from flash to video and has hundreds of thousands of plays on YouTube as I mentioned above in my first post, and the number of plays probably tallies to well over a million from the bunch of home-made user videos as well on YouTube. SSMatt 05:30, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'll put in on AFD so there can be another discussion on it. Wickethewok 04:33, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see that you voted to remove the article. That's fine. But I would just like to add that the ONLY arguement anybody used to say that it should be deleted was that there wasn't a "source" online that they deemed worthy enough. Why do you even bother having the other critera when that's the only one anybody looks at? Why have guidelines if the mods aren't going to follow them? It's stupid. It's not objective, it's just popular vote. I gave more than enough reasons that fell into other criteria about this artist and his song, and you all ignored them all and used one guideline as a judge as to whether the article should be deleted. I wouldn't really mind if it wasn't completely contradictive of the guidelines page that was set up. I would just like to suggest that in the future when you decide to delete articles, at least follow the Wikipedia guidelines AS they're written, and just take out the guidelines that you all decide aren't important enough to follow. It's very frustrating that you're making the rules up as you go.

    Speaking of which, now that I'm writing this, I can see here, that one of the criteria has been edited to exclude one of the the grounds for which Bob Ricci was eligible after you decided to delete my article. But I wrote that article and argued under the original guidelines that that you set, and now you've wasted a lot of my time and yours since you've decided to change them suddenly. It wasn't fair to me at all, since as of writing my article, it technically qualified to be up under your guidelines at the time. And you are the one who refered me to WP:BAND where I read those guidelines. SSMatt 17:29, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I told you that the article needed reliable sources to show that it met WP:BAND. You did not do this. Instead, you merely provided links to places the video was hosted. No sources, no article. Also, AFD isn't a vote, it is a place to gather consesus, and the deletion decision was unanimous. If you come up with independent reliable sources in the future, you are welcome to present your case at deletion review. Wickethewok 17:46, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • You're not getting it. I'm not saying YOU didn't tell me I needed reliable sources. I'm saying you refered me to a Wikipedia guidelines page that said that as an alternative to having an online reliable source, I can present other criterion including a large amount of digital downloads, regular rotation on popular radio stations, etc... which Bob Ricci met, and you all decided unanimously to delete him based on the fact that there were no sources dispite what the Wikipedia guidelines said. So, yes, it may have been a consensus, but the people who voted didn't follow the guidelines of Wikipedia. I wouldn't have wasted my time putting up the article if the critea page said: "Critera: MUST have reliable source". It doesn't say that. It says and I quote: "A musician or ensemble (note that this includes a band, singer, rapper, orchestra, hip hop crew, DJ, musical theatre group, etc.) is notable if it meets any ONE of the following criteria". It offers many other criterion that can be met, which none of you considered. Everyone voted to delete on grounds that there's no reliable source, so that must be the only criterion that you all seem to have decided matters. So change the page to say that. SSMatt 21:18, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The first thing I said to word-for-word in this thread was "You need to add reliable sources that show the subject meets WP:BAND. Check out WP:RS for a better definition of a reliable source. In this case, professional album reviews or music magazine articles would be what you need to cite in the article." Note the now bolded words. So you are incorrect. Wickethewok 01:46, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Amidst the Raindrops --AWESOME!![edit]

Dear Wickethewok,

I just listened to the song titled "Amidst the Raindrops" by The Sanctuary Moon. First I thought The Sanctuary Moon is a record label artist --and I tried to find the album on ebay. Well, didn't find anything. Turned out The Sanctuary Moon is actually *you*, am I correct?

So you're an indie musician, aren't you? Have you completed an album? And if that's the case, how to buy it? Particularly, how to buy a complete version of "Amidst the Raindrops"?

Well I don't have a Wikipedia account, so please reply to kreshna.iceheart@yahoo.com.

Thanks & regards, -Kresh —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 222.124.75.223 (talk) 17:06, 14 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Dear Wickethewok,

I would seriously consider sending the song Amidst The Raindrops to some record labels, I heard it and thought that the Sanctuary Moon must be some famous prog artist out there, and went to google...but found nothing. Could you also hook me up with a copy of the song? xruntime@gmail.com

Later,

Sid G —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.76.176.94 (talk) 22:49, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seven Cities[edit]

After no significant expansion in a whole year, I've given up and converted this to a disambiguation page. Sources aside, it's always seemed embarrassingly short. (If you want to do anything else with that single cover before the bots tag it...) –Unint 22:14, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for the heads up - hopefully I can get back into some more involved article writing in a couple weeks after I've finished off my last school project. Wickethewok 01:56, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rosie O'Donnell page needs to be locked[edit]

The Rosie O'Donnell page is constantly being vandalized by non wikipedia users needs to either be locked or the individuals need to be banned. --18:24, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Looks like someone took care of that already. You can always use WP:RPP to report pages that need to be protected. There are always people watching that, so its probably quicker to use that if something needs to be done quickly. Wickethewok 22:32, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

African-American Office Holders[edit]

You seem to be interested in this topic. I wanted to alert you to another article with overlapping coverage:

African Americans in the United States Congress

Check it out -- I think you'll be pleased. However, it isn't focused on officeholders who only held state offices. That article is in need of creation. Mitchumch 23:06, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Umm, I think you might have the wrong guy. I don't think I've ever edited any government or African American articles before... Wickethewok 23:50, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Seven cities.gif)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Seven cities.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 18:56, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shakespeare project collaboration[edit]

The Shakespeare Project has begun a collaboration to bring its main article, William Shakespeare, to FA status. If you wish to contribute, please review the to-do list on its talk page. Let's make this article an FA! Wrad 15:28, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Smile[edit]

GreaterWikiholic has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Pronunciation[edit]

Wicke-the-wok? Wicket-he-wok? How should one pronounce your username? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tar7arus (talk • contribs)

  • Heheh. I pronounce it "Wicket the Ewok".  :-P Wickethewok 14:51, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WHY?![edit]

WHY DID YOU DELETE MY "Nephiopia"?

Jay 20:01, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. What you posted looked like a short story fragment or just some nonsense. If you are looking for a place to post stuff like this, I suggest http://uncyclopedia.org/ or something like everything2. Wickethewok 20:03, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IT WAS NOT NOSENCE OR A STORIE! HOW DARE YOU TAKE A **** OUT OF SOMEONES RELIGION!

  • You clearly made it up, there aren't even any Google hits for it. If you feel this was deleted in error, you may put it up for deletion review at WP:DRV. Wickethewok 20:10, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ITS MY BELIVES I DONT NEED TO STICK IT ON GOOGLE

Deletion of my article, The Story of Jeff[edit]

Could you please explain why my article was deleted and what has to be changed for it not to be deleted. I clearly stated that the 'dossier' is fictional. The Story of Jeff was created by people in my school, and the content has been spread about the local area and is known to many.—Preceding unsigned comment added by ByPyth (talk • contribs)

malcolm (rapper)[edit]

Hi, Wickethewok. I have a question for you why do you keep deleting my article I created, Malcolm (rapper). If I forgot to do something in the process of creating it please let me know, and tell me how to do it. I am new here at Wikipedia.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Considerdollersaschange (talk • contribs)

  • Articles must cite independent reliable sources, so that the information shown in them can be seen to be verifiable. If you think that you have such sources, you are welcome to have the article undeleted via deletion. For a better definition of reliable sources, see WP:RS. Wickethewok 20:28, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

please do not delete my page (malcolm (rapper)) please i work very hard on it.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Considerdollersaschange (talk • contribs)

The New York Palace[edit]

What if I get the permission of the man who wrote the article? Can I still create the page?—Preceding unsigned comment added by JustSmile325 (talk • contribs)

  • The appropriate way to obtain permission is for the web page to state the licensing as I described on your talk page:

    ...to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later."

That said, the text that was used in the deleted article is promotional, and most likely not suitable to a neutral point of view encyclopedia. Wickethewok 20:55, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Metope (producer)[edit]

A "{{prod}}" template has been added to the article Metope (producer), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the 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 {{dated prod}} 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. Videmus Omnia 23:29, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • I fixed up the article and removed the PROD. Feel free to review it if you like and thanks for the heads up. Wickethewok 15:10, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Fortier[edit]

Yeah, he emailed me that someone identifying themselves as a wikipedia editor had contacted him for pictures/info, as I had done the same some months ago, and did the first re-edit based on what he sent. I'm hoping to get links to some interviews/reviews/other info from him for more background/history that comes from not Chris directly (if that makes nay sense). I also hope to do a comprehensive fade discography/record label background soon.

I'm still a bit of a rookie at all of this, but am very into what wikipedia should be, and electronic music in general. Hopefully time will allow me to be a bit more productive soon.

Thanks for the help,


CS

  • Cooltastic. Lemme know if you need help with anything in particular. Wickethewok 17:56, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Chris Fortier seems like a really cool guy, I'm surprised how quickly he got back to me also. Cheers! Wickethewok 20:33, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not trying to be a hater or something but..[edit]

Hey, I know that this is old, but why did you delete the FredTheMonkey.com page?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.30.187.202 (talk • contribs)

Fair use rationale for Image:Live93.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Live93.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation 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. Videmus Omnia 23:51, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lynda Benglis[edit]

Hi Wickethewok. I nominated Lynda Benglis to appear on the Main Page under the Did you know... section. The nomination hook appears here. There is a five day from creation window for DYK nominations, so I wanted to make sure it was in the cue. Please feel free to revise the nomination hook as you see fit. Great job on the article. -- Jreferee (Talk) 02:42, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Heya, thanks a lot! I was trying to think of something to add to DYK for the article, but couldn't think of what, so cheers! Wickethewok 02:45, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation[edit]

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Danah Boyd, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible. --Elonka 23:58, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Request for Mediation[edit]

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party has been accepted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Danah Boyd.
For the Mediation Committee, ^demon[omg plz]
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to open new mediation cases. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.
This message delivered: 12:18, 27 June 2007 (UTC).

DYK[edit]

Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Gu009.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Gu009.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia: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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation 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. --Mr. Lefty (talk) 20:54, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chimera (Resistance: Fall of Man)[edit]

I am suggesting to delete Chimera (Resistance: Fall of Man) because of gamecruft. But most of the people in the debate want to merge it. It contains various images that will become orphans if the article is merged. Will the images be deleted or will the be left as orphans for some bot or something to catch? --Cs california 11:06, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Any orphaned fair use images will caught by bots. If you want to tag them yourself after the merge, you can use the {{orfud}} tag. Wickethewok 13:02, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: Vandalism[edit]

Ok. Zora72

Peter Meinig[edit]

The Cornell Project is including separate articles, with succession boxes, for each of the 15 people who have served as Chairman of Cornell's Board of Trustees. Peter is the current Chair of an organization with a $5 Billion endowment, which is one of the eight Ivy League prominent Universities. I suggest that his prominence in the business community and philantrophy easily satisfies Wikipedia standards. He is an extremely wealthy, successful and generous man. Racepacket 00:04, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Um, ok... If you have the independent sources to write about him, go ahead. Wickethewok 03:49, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:DaE clip.ogg[edit]

Hi! Could you tell me an artist/album/track of this sample- ? --A4 19:21, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • The track name is "DaE" by The Sanctuary Moon. Its unpublished, but if you'd like a fuller version, send me an email. Wickethewok 19:52, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Shakespeare Collaboration[edit]

The Shakespeare Wikiproject is starting another collaboration to bring Romeo and Juliet to GA status. Our last collaboration on William Shakespeare is still in progress, but in the copyedit stage. If you have strong copyedit skills, you may wish to continue the work on that article. Members with skills in other areas are now moving on. Improving Romeo and Juliet article will set a standard for all other Shakespeare plays, so we look forward to seeing everyone there. Thanks for all your help with the project. Wrad 20:43, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why was Zeitgeist the movie deleted?[edit]

Why did you delete the information for Zeitgeist the movie?

www.zeitgeistmovie.com

Is that not a good enough source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ssynesthesia (talk • contribs)


04:29, 15 July 2007 Wickethewok (Talk | contribs) deleted "Zeitgeist The Movie" (redir w/ no target)

Image:Pvd-politics2.jpeg[edit]

I have tagged Image:Pvd-politics2.jpeg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. Videmus Omnia Talk 04:23, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • The image needed to be replaced with a lower quality one anyway, so I went ahead and uploaded a new one with fair use rationale at Image:Pvd-politics2.jpg. Wickethewok 04:31, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

amidst the raindrops[edit]

hey i really like this song. can i download/buy it? do you have more? Supersonic^ 16:54, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks (Deleteing The Demented Cartoon Movie)[edit]

Hello. Back in October, the page The Demented Cartoon Movie was up for deletion, you were the admin making the final decision. I wanted the page to be kept as I felt it was valuable and I had put in work to keep the page alive and cleaning up vandalism, finding screenshots, etc.

When it was deleted, I was so annoyed with Wikipedia that I decided to take my time and effort elsewhere. I found YouTube shortly afterwards and discovered that I had a minor aptitude for video-making. Since then I've met many new friends through YouTube, which I probably would not have met if I were still doing wikipedia.

When that page was deleted, it woke me up to the harsh reality that my time on wikipedia was thank-less. Now, I'm even helping out new friends with their videos and people watching actually thank me directly for my work. That would never have happened if you had decided the consensus was for keeping that page. Thank you, and I mean that sincerely. --Billpg 21:36, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • I do feel bad about deleting people's hard work and I understand how you could feel that way. I really dislike it when articles get a lot of work put into them, even though the material still can't meet guidelines/policies, as it is a waste of everyone's effort (my user page aside talks about this a little). I think this happens a lot less with newer articles that can't meet WP:N/WP:V/whatever, as these are usually merged/deleted/redirected before too much effort gets thrown into them. Working directly with friends on online projects is really rewarding and solo Wikipedia work is often thankless. Working with other people via WikiProjects or whatever can certainly be more rewarding. So, if you do decide to come back, I look into joining or creating a Wikiproject that suits your interests. As you might know, I can temporarily undelete the Demented Cartoon Movie article for you so you can use the text for another wiki or something if you want. Wickethewok 22:07, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Gu021.jpg[edit]

I have tagged Image:Gu021.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. (ESkog)(Talk) 05:23, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CVU status[edit]

The Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit project is under consideration to be moved to {{inactive}} and/or {{historical}} status. Another proposal is to delete or redirect the project. You have been identified as a project member and your input as to this matter would be welcomed at WT:CVU#Inactive.3F and at the deletion debate. Thank you! Delivered on behalf of xaosflux 17:51, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removing tracklisting links from DJ articles[edit]

I was a bit suspicious myself when I saw an IP user adding external links to a number of DJ articles, however, looking closer at the links, I came to the conclusion that this was indeed quite useful secondary material which would be of high interest to many of the readers of these articles. Perhaps you would consider this again? __meco 12:40, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yeah, maybe you are right. Its just that the editor was pretty much just spamming these links everywhere. I wouldn't be opposed if you re-added them. Wickethewok 18:09, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I went ahead and did the changes. __meco 18:35, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Single cover[edit]

Hi there. Can you help me with a cover in Overpowered (song) and tell what's wrong? Thank you.--Kochas 12:42, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hiya! What was wrong was that there was a bit of extra text "(song)|Overpowered", and the cover was getting screwed up due to the "|" pipe. Check the diff to see the fix. Wickethewok 14:45, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks a lot;-) --Kochas 23:50, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikicodia[edit]

Would you please check the Wikicodia talk page. I was creating while you deleted the article.

Muhammad Abou-Basha 19:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Blogs, listing sites (such as Alexa), forum threads, and the website in question are not reliable and independent sources of information. If you need a more complete definition of reliable sources on Wikipedia, see WP:RS. Wickethewok 20:46, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dubstep[edit]

Hey there, I wondered if you would mind giving this article a read through as you suggested on the talk page? Editing's slowed down a bit recently but I've been considering whether it might be ready for a GA nomination, and your opinion on this would be most welcome. Cheers, - Zeibura (Talk) 01:30, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sure thing, I'll try to give it a look tomorrow. Wickethewok 05:21, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of wikis[edit]

What is that crit don't fit those you deleted? --Beyond silence 14:31, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • They must be notable by WP:WEB, thus having been written about by independent reliable sources. I believe this criteria is mentioned in a comment at the top of the List of wikis page and on its talk page at the top. Wickethewok 14:36, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think that good sites, but ok. --Beyond silence 15:48, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
List of wikis is generating some discussion, thought you might like to comment in case you're not watching the page proper. WLU (talk) 19:52, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:OrbKiss.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:OrbKiss.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia: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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation 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.BetacommandBot 12:32, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know...[edit]

Updated DYK query On 5 September, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hans Namuth, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Allen3 talk 23:13, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i schools[edit]

you nominated the library and information school lists for deletions, shouldn't you nominate the ischool list? all it does is call a set of programs a school. --Buridan 00:36, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Maybe, I'll have to take a look at it. All of the reasons I listed may not apply to this case, but I can't say at this point. Wickethewok 02:07, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use disputed for Image:AHEGPB clip.ogg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:AHEGPB clip.ogg. 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 Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia: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 02:30, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taste, Wikipedia etiquette, etc.[edit]

About a year ago, you removed my entry about my brother, Craig Miles, after I spent some time and effort to document his "notability."

Obviously, in writing about my brother I expect extra scrutiny from other Wikipedians.

That said, my brother is lawyer and a partner at King and Spaulding. He has been responsible for recovering billions of dollars from Latin American sovereigns and is considered to be one of the finest 30-something lawyers in the USA according to the ABA and other sources.

You write articles about persons and subjects that are utterly unknown to me. They aren't "notable," in my little universe.

But I love your articles. I enjoy Wikipedia because I get the serrendipitous joy of learning about new stuff.

What I don't get is someone who trolls Wikipedia looking for articles to delete without even attempting to post on the talk page.

Please explain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mileage (talk • contribs) 07:26, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hiya! I don't think I had anything to do with that deletion. According to the log, that article was proposed for deletion almost a year ago by an anonymous editor and deleted by User:Nihiltres. If you have some sources with which to dispute the "non-notability" claim, I suggest you contact either the deleting admin (User:Nihiltres) or use the undeletion procedure at deletion review. I think I just notified you of its deletion, I didn't delete or nominate it for deletion myself. Thanks! Wickethewok 13:04, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Harmonic Mixing article[edit]

Hi Wickethewok,

Thank you, I am glad to help with Harmonic Mixing. It was fun to expand an article about a topic so close to my heart. I have been DJing harmonically for many years, so it was easy to speak with confidence.

I also noticed that you're a fan of Sasha, and you have John Digweed on your future "edit" list. It sounds like we listen to the same music. Have you considered expanding the "mash-up" and Sasha article to include his involvement in Harmonic Mixing? It's an important part of his DJ sets, and he's practically invented that style of mixing in progressive house.

What do you think, can we find a printed reference to his involvement with this technique?

Take care, Yakov —Preceding unsigned comment added by Djyakov (talk • contribs) 06:29, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • That would be cool, I've been looking through the books on Amazon using the "Search inside this book" feature to try to find some stuff about Sasha and harmonic mixing. Haven't found anything online yet either, except just really brief mentions. I'll keep looking though, as I agree that this is something that should be discussed in the article. Wickethewok 18:55, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Pvd-sevenways.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Pvd-sevenways.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 Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia: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 13:26, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

General Mayhem[edit]

Thank you for leaving me a personalised message and informing me of the deletion on my talk page. I did not mean to circumvent the rules by changing the article title (from Mayhem to mayhem). I did not want to bother with the behind-the-scenes ask-other-users-what-they-think-of-the-matter process: I thought that if I corrected the problems and put it at an alternate article location someone such as yourself would come upon it, view the talk page, and move it. I thought the links I referenced were quite alright: They do nothing but state the facts. The genmay.com/showgroups.php tells no lies: It tells the user who is an Administrator, moderator and super-moderator on that particular forum. I would liken it to berkshirehathaway.com telling the user Warren Buffet is its CEO. Other sources include forum posts made by the Sanjay, the owner of Genmay, on both properties he owns and official Vbulletin support forums. In general I think forum posts are a bad source, as anyone can create them. But if the posts are made by say, the owner of the website in question, ON the website in question, I would let it fly. Other sources, such as uploaderx.net, which backs up the The General [M]ayhem community is very dedicated, known to write programs and create web services such as image hosting...". www.Uploaderx.net states "Pics can only be viewed from genmay for now, I may change this in the future". Or saying there is a game, and then linking to the game. What is wrong with that? It's not a Wall Street Journal article detailing its existence, it is THE WEBSITE, period. I thought the Whois references would be pretty clear: The Whois record tells when the website was created. This backs up that the website was created on the 4th of July, 2002. Personally I do not think Genmay or any other silly forum (e.g. all forums) should have a Wikipedia entry. However if other silly websites have them, so should Genmay. Disclosure: I am a genmay member of two years. --Henry W. Schmitt 05:23, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • I agree that many more websites have entries than should. While being bold is certainly commendable, it is often quicker to just go straight to the "behind-the-scenes ask-other-users-what-they-think-of-the-matter process" for issues where there will almost certainly be disagreement on. While stuff like whois and primary material such as the website itself can be useful as a supplement for an article, Wikipedia articles should generally be based on reliable, third-party published sources, as they tend to give a more general, unbiased view of why the website may be important. Again, I am not at all a final decision-maker by any means, so you are welcome to request a review. Wickethewok 05:42, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I had a good two paragraphs typed up but I accidentally closed my web-browser. In short I noted that Genmay is a close-knit community, with not much outside contact, hence no third party references. I went on to detail a particular event which occurred last week on the forum which caused an attention seeking woman IRL to ball up on the floor of her apartment crying after the torment [M]embers threw at her. I later noted that most on-line communities are like this, including many featured on Wikipedia.org. Finally I wrote that I dislike WikiPolicies and you should refer to my user-page to be further enlightened by my eloquent prose. Of course Genmay does not need an entry on this website, or any other website. I close this letter by including General Mayhem's official[citation needed] slogan: The Internet is SERIOUS BUSINESS. -Henry W. Schmitt 08:59, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah given that your GM community seems to be a fairly closed one, does give it a disadvantage it terms of secondary coverage. Writing critically, accurately, and performing original research is best left to reputable fact-checking sources (imho at least), rather than with anonymous/pseudo-anonymous editors like ourselves (and I think this is in line with what current Wikipedia guidelines and policies are as well). Maybe a magazine like Wired or something will do an expose` on large, but tight-knit internet communities some day or something. I like to think that the article space is in fact serious business, but there's always amusement to be found in User:, Wikipedia:, and Talk: spaces, as long as you follow fun guidelines, fill out an application for amusement (which is then approved by 2 or more admins), and post a diff of it on the Happy Times Sunshine Verification Noticeboard (WP:HTSVN).  ;-P Wickethewok 13:19, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Whilst listening to music this morning I noticed something: Genmay is mentioned inthree of YTCracker's songs. Also ytcracker is a member. Also I am still confused why posting certified facts is not good. Although this is an extreme example, is there anything wrong with linking to the CIA World Factbook? That just tells you raw information, so do many of the sources I cited. E.g. [1]. Right now I'm just arguing because I like arguing. I see no future in this debate. --Henry W. Schmitt 19:43, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, a lot of the time, its not necessarily truth thats under question. Its necessary to use secondary sources to ensure that the article is not biased and to make sure that there's no undue weight on the opinions and statements of people directly associated with an organization/website/etc. As an extreme example, let's use Microsoft. If we just used information gleaned from their website along with other cultural references (blogs, forums, etc) and directory listings, we would get a pretty incomplete picture of the software company to the point where the article would most likely be biased and violate neutral point of view. This is all ignoring the vague qualifications of notability, which I think has been abused to the point that I make sure "non-notability" isn't the primary deletion reason, though it is still tied to verifiability and reliable sources. Anyways, having every piece of verifiable information makes it hard to find out what exactly is important about certain subjects. With regards to the CIA World Factbook, I'm not quite sure what you're getting at. The World Factbook is a reliable source of information and statistics, so it would be an appropriate source of information to use when writing about stuff it covers. It certainly shouldn't be used as the only source when writing an article and the information in it is about subjects that are "notable". Other published directories contain information about unremarkable subjects (phonebooks, etc). If I'm not quite answering your specific question, could you rephrase it? Cheers! Wickethewok 22:00, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ils[edit]

I restored it immediately. I'm sorry for the trouble. NCurse work 06:18, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for your dedication[edit]

i am a new editor to wikipedia, and still learning. Thanks for cleaning up some of my work on Creamer & K and Rosko.

I'm a bit confused about a few things, but it seems this is the appropriate place to comment. I'm confused about tagging images because the guidelines are a bit overwhelming. I put a copyright tag on the Rosko image ( i think i did it correctly) but i still keep getting messages saying it will be deleted if i don't tag. Do you think that editing my own talk page, and removing the original warning, will stop that from happening?

I would happily put more effort into improving articles on electronic music artists (I'm starting with the ones i know the best), but one step at a time. The more i learn, the more confident i will be about contributing more.

Anyways, i'm impressed with wikipedia because ppl like you put a great deal of effort into making it valid. So, again, thanks:)

(Nadiafan 03:53, 5 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

  • Hiya, and thanks for adding to Wikipedia.  :-) Anyways, from what I see, you've only been messaged once by an automated bot regarding the copyright status of the image you uploaded. Anyways, next time you upload an image, make sure you specify the source and copyright status (you can select the copyright status from the drop-down menu). As for the current image in question (Image:Rosko musik.jpg), you need to specify the web address where you obtained the image from. After that, you need to say the copyright status of the photo. This can be a little tricky, as there are issues here such as fair use and such. First off, is the image copyrighted? If so, does the copyright owner explicitly allow use of the image for any purposes? I assume its not licensed under a free license, such as a Creative Commons license or GFDL. If its an album cover, it probably falls under fair use. If this is the case, slap the {{Non-free album cover}} template on there. Then you need to write up a quick fair use statement saying why it specifically meets the requirements for fair use - I can help you with this if you want. Wickethewok 04:48, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks so much for your help, i really do appreciate it. I changed the tag to the album cover one you said, and it seems all good. But I can't figure out how to write up a statement. Is there a template for that? I'm just not exactly sure where to write it or put it.  :) Nadiafan 06:27, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, there's an ongoing debate on what sort of statement satisfies fair use terms, but here's an example of an album image/summary that fulfills fair use terms: Image:Gu009.jpg. Something along the lines there should be fine. People have different opinions on what satisfies a good justification, but something like that should satisfy anyone. While album covers usually fall under fair use (for the album articles), copyrighted/non-free photos should be avoided wherever possible in favor of free material. You might want to take a glance at WP:FU when you get a chance, specifically #1 under Policy. For living subjects, non-free photos are generally replaceable with free ones, as people can simply take photos of them. This is especially true with bands/performers, as they make regular public appearances. Anyways, the use of non-free media is one of the stickier topics on Wikipedia, so in general its best to only use it when necessary, as Wikipedia is supposed to be a free encyclopedia after all. For example, I see you've been working on the article Rosko. Right now there's a non-free photo used as the lead photo in the article. While not an immediate issue, this should eventually be replaced with a free image. This could be either a fan-taken photo, or maybe a professionally done one that the artist could donate to the site. I've written to a few DJs, like Chris Fortier and Phil K, who agreed to license some of their promotional photos under a Creative Commons Attribution license (meaning that they allow anyone to use the photo for anything, as long as they are credited). Any more questions, I'm glad to help out.  :-) Wickethewok 13:39, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Great...thanks again for the insights. I work in electronic music here in nyc, and know a lot of dj's and artists personally. i agree that sometimes the promotional photos that are most commonly associated with the artist are great and usually of much higher quality than the photos taken by fans that are free. i also know that many of the artists themselves appreciate seeing the images they approved for release and distribution as opposed to grainy washed out snapshots from a fan's camera phone. i can get permission to use some better images. but is it super involved? ie with Chris Fortier, did he just email you and then the email stating permission was filed in that secure database? or is it a long involved process where you had to mail him some form and get signatures or deal with lawyers? i'm trying to determine whether i will talk to artists like nadia ali, c & k, roger sanchez etc. about getting images from them. if it's a big hassle to prove that i got their permission, i will probably avoid this and go another route. thanks!:) Nadiafan 15:59, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually just found the guidelines for requesting permission by email. I will give it a try...::) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nadiafan (talk • contribs) 17:01, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, there are some form letter type things which I think you found. Usually, I just email the artist telling them the terms of using a Creative Commons license and attach a text file which they "sign" (type their name and date) and then I forward that to the OTRS people. Basically you just need to show that you have clearly explained the terms of using a free license to the artist and that they agree to it. Anything here should be fine if you hadn't found this page yet (really useful stuff!): Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. Or they can just always declare it public domain if they don't care about attribution/licensing. Also, free photos should be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons so that any and all Wikimedia projects can use it, instead of just English Wikipedia. Also, don't forget to sign your posts using four tildas (~~~~). Any pics you could get would be great! Also, if you are looking for some fellow collaborators for electronic music articles, check out this Wikiproject Wikipedia:WikiProject Electronic music. Participation there is off-and-on, but if you need any help with any sort of electronic music stuff or would like to see what others are working on, I recommend stopping by. Wickethewok 21:56, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

California state editing Biases[edit]

It has come to my attention that the page Leland Yee has been modified several times in the past from the California Senate office. His staff are trying to make the page onesided The edits made the page one sided (ie. removing controverties such as Video gaming info, allegations of prostitution ...etc) and used words non neutral wording. It was also reported in GamePolitics, radio and many gaming forums. So can you watch the page? I just redid the whole thing to be nonbias.

Thanks --Cs california 07:35, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yeah, I'll help out with that. Nice work cleaning up the article btw. Cheers! Wickethewok 13:45, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
thanks --Cs california 16:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Look Wickethewok the news put the bias changes on their paper it can be seen here and lol they mistakenly said I am an admin --Cs california 09:08, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, nice - you are famous! Wickethewok 12:57, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled comment[edit]

Hi I dont know why this person should be deleted whil others have info? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Freeir2007 (talk • contribs) 07:39, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Please see WP:BIO for some basic standards on biographical notability. The person you have written about has no such claims to notability and have thus been deleted repeatedly. Please refrain from recreating this article. There have also been no third party reliable sources cited in any of the versions you have created, which is what Wikipedia articles should be based on. Wickethewok 13:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Thank you very much for the help and the enthusiasm... i am very fond of FIla Brazillia and i realy want to get it to feautured... thanks again for your help... and any suggestions on how to get to feautured? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Juanscott (talk • contribs) 15:51, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Heheh, hard work?  ;-) Seriously though, I first examine each source I have one at a time. Whenever I find a good chunk of information, I write it in my own words and note where I got the information from. Try to pick out the most important information and leave out the extremely specific things. I'll do this for each of the sources I have leaving me with a bunch of separate sentences. Next I sort the sentences into broad sections (such as "Influences", "Technology/Techniques", "Biography", etc...) and then put each of those sections into some sort of logical order. Then join the sentences together with connective phrases. From there, you just basically refine the article in terms of grammar and organization. The basic criteria for a Featured Article can be found here: WP:FA?. However, first I would suggest shooting for a good article, whose criteria is easier to meet. If English is not your native language, you may want to consider writing it first in your native language and then translating it to English, but thats your call. Hope this is of some help! Also, don't forget to sign your posts with ~~~~. Wickethewok 18:38, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rob Neyer page[edit]

Why did you edit the Rob Neyer page to remove the fact that he participated in the longest ESPN.com chat and that he went to high school with one of the Geico cavemen?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.74.105.122 (talk) 00:22, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • The Geico caveman bit is excessively trivial and not encyclopedic. Feel free to put the longest chat thing back if you cite it. Wickethewok 00:32, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Amidst the Raindrops[edit]

Hello, I am a music producer, record label A&R, radio programmer of electronic music and EM retailer based in Norway, and heard this song "Amidst the Raindrops" on Wikipedia. Is there more of this music available? I would like to get in touch with the artist, please write to glenn at folkvord.net soon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.165.66.247 (talk) 18:00, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply sent. Wickethewok 20:16, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Sanctuary Moon[edit]

I really liked a sample you left on the Breakbeat page - where can I get hold of more? henry.standing@gmail.com

Regards

Henry —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.177.160.92 (talk) 23:03, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I already posted here before about the track, but I'm wondering if you have any other work? An album perhaps?

Amidst the Raindrops is so awesome. Some real quality in that track, i'm telling you mate, if you just send it out to a few labels its almost certain to get signed. And if you come out with an EP or an album, I'll be the first to buy it! xruntime@gmail.com

71.125.73.23 (talk) 03:50, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dance music[edit]

i believe you are incorrect. the last discussion was began by myself and the result was the moving of the traditional "Dance music" to "Dancing music", and the "Dance music" article to refer to the modern electronic variety. This has since been reverted with no discussion. so i put it back. There are possibly thousands of articles which link to "dance music" as a genre and these are refering to the modern electronic variety. Bungalowbill 15:39, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • I responded on the electronic music talk page. Lets keep the discussion centralized there now. Wickethewok 15:41, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi[edit]

Okay.. I will take care of the references... I know the artist through John Zorn and his works in collaboration with several Artists and Writers living in New York City and institutions outside the city... Keep in touch (Webb Traverse 22:13, 3 November 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Hey...[edit]

I have a question... Are you familiar with wiki commons for photography? I am trying to build a library of amazing photography from Scandinavia and Russia and several places in Northern Europe... Common sense... briefly... what would be the correct way to build it? (Webb Traverse 07:24, 4 November 2007 (UTC))[reply]

  • I'm not sure what you mean exactly. Do you mean that you wish to build a personal library of images from Wikimedia Commons? Wickethewok 17:51, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey!![edit]

Hey, someone deleted the DCM (Demented cartoon movie). Why? I have seen it. Also, I am new around here. Also, the movie is cool. Can you (At Least) bring back it? Relorelo84 01:04, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zeitgeist (video)[edit]

Notability question[edit]

Hi mate, long time no see! Heads up: Talk:The_KLF#Messiah. --kingboyk 21:33, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'll get to this soon. Just sorting out some computer stuff over the past few days. Wickethewok 18:31, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scans[edit]

I will scan and upload them to a blog or site soon... thanks (Webb Traverse 07:58, 13 November 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Dance music[edit]

Dance music (electronic) has been created to accomodate a more balanced view. Please take a look. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.83.157.10 (talk) 16:38, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Commented on the appropriate talk page. Wickethewok 17:35, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar[edit]

The Invisible Barnstar
For being with us for so many years, and for many years to come, raise a glass. Marlith T/C 06:01, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Morris-poster.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Morris-poster.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 Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia: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) 17:25, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

house music demo[edit]

I just thoroughly enjoyed listening to this, despite the fact it's been removed from the house music article by an anon. Since you say you're open to suggestions I guess something less dissonant and more soulful would probably be more friendly in the main genre article. What you have here sounds like a pretty good example of tech house, but that is, after all, only half house music :) - Zeibura (Talk) 20:10, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hey thanks, Zeibura. Do you have any suggestions for models to use as typical house music? I usually don't listen to much "soulful" house so a couple specific suggestions would be helpful. Also, do you think the current version of the track should be added to the tech house article then? Cheers! Wickethewok 20:45, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ja Fool[edit]

I understand why you deleted it, but I just wanted to say it wasnt an attack towards him, I actaully like him, I only did it because thats what 50 Cent and G-Unit call him--Rockies17 05:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ok, thats cool, but its still an attack term used by them. Wickethewok 05:26, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ok, I wont do it again--Rockies17 05:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lampara/John Voyd sock activity[edit]

First, were you aware of User:Wickethewok/FalsePositives/Reports/Its Pytch.. Hon? Second, I've got a 99% positive feeling our User:Its Pytch.. Hon = User:Webb Traverse. Hmm. Anyway, thought you may like to know about the page... The Rambling Man (talk) 10:56, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • I went ahead and deleted that page, as its in my userspace. Thanks for the heads up. Wickethewok (talk) 19:24, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup templates[edit]

Just to let you know that most cleanup templates, like "unreferenced", "fact", "cleanup", "Primary sources" etc., are best not "subst"ed . See WP:SUBST for more details. Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 08:58 6 December 2007 (GMT).

  • Alright, coolio. I guess I'm not up to date on which ones should be subst'd. I don't think I usually do it for "fact", but I thought we were supposed to for "unreferenced"/"primarysources" (maybe this used to be the case). Anyways, thanks - I'll do this in the future. Wickethewok 06:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the photo, cheers I've updated as requested.

I'm going to be adding his full discography soon... is there anything I need to know in regards to doing this. I don't want to list the entire thing and then have it re-edited and rejected like the updates I made today, know what I mean?

Let me know.

Thanks again for your help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Djchrisallen (talk • contribs) 06:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Wickethewok/Archive_6&oldid=390565050"