Talk:RAQ

Jan 26 - Clean-up

I'm currently working on cleaning-up the page. We have a small team of people gathering the proper information to make the site more extensive. We also received a report that neutrality of this article is disputed? Please advise. Finally, we're cleaning-up our source citations/references and have create this Talk page. Makisupa69 03:40, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. That message was probably added for me because I included those tags. Sorry I didn't have time to give reason last time, but honestly, I'm here to help.
Basically, what you need to do is see the Wikipedia Manual of Style to get an idea how an article should look. It's great that each article is by different people, but regular editors try to make them look the same. A few edits I've made lately are to clean it up a bit.
There's also things like spelling, grammar and punctuation. I'll brush through the article in a minute and help you out with that. Also, (and this was a reason why I tagged it a while back), the article needs to be stating fact, rather than saying things like "...[their] music is quite enigmatic and often paradoxical" because that's a Point of View. We include opinions, but only from sources which we then cite.
Sorry, I know at this point I sound like I'm nagging, but I only mean to help out. I hope I've explained why I included those tags. Anyways, I could always keep an eye over the article if you like, otherwise if you need my help, leave me a message. Best of luck — cuaHL 10:30, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Me again. I was looking through similar articles I thought you might want to look at to see what a good article looks like, and the best I found to use as comparison was Red Hot Chili Peppers and Jane's Addiction. Hope that helps. If you have any trouble using Wikicoding (ie. {| and |}) ask! — cuaHL 10:50, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jan 27 - Article naming and copyright

Thanks again. I'll be working to better the page. Quick question: I'm creating song stubs with information about RAQ's songs and their lyrics. How would I create a song stub for their song "Georgia" seeing that Georgia has so many articles already? Makisupa69 00:21, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, see Wikipedia:Naming conventions#Music for the basics. I think creating an article like Georgia (RAQ song) would be good, and making an entry on the Georgia (disambiguation) page. Also, be sure to check out this article section to see why I keep editing the subsections! Hope that helps — cuaHL 22:33, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I hope you don't mind me saying this but many editors may see the articles for each song as unimportant. Just so you know, I'm inclusionist, so it's not my personal opinion, but you'll get those opinions from others! If this happens, the article will be put on AfD. Why not consider putting all song information on an article for each individual album? For example, Shed Tech.

Oh and as for inclusion of lyrics, be sure to check out the policy on lyrics. I've often seen lyrics been removed (eg1...eg2) but if the lyrics are owned by you, or someone you can get to release the lyrics, I don't see a problem! Hope that's enough homework for you ;) — cuaHL 22:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ps. Wikipedia:Copyright

Cover songs correction?

I have never heard RAQ cover the original "Trouble Every Day" by Frank Zappa, it is more of a twangy telecaster, talking blues style version. I have heard Raq cover the remake "More Trouble Every Day" twice. "Trouble Every Day" is originally from the Freak Out album, 1966. "More Trouble Every Day" first appeared on the album Roxy & Elsewhere, 1974. The Roxy & Elsewhere album notes credit "More Trouble Every Day" as being copyrighted in 1965. Is anyone else a Zappa expert that can offer a second opinion?

Regardless, there is no Zappa song titled "Trouble Everyday" with Everyday written as one word. The correct spelling of the original song is "Trouble Every Day", with Every Day written as two words. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Karacter0 (talk • contribs) 04:39, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:CarbsCD.jpg

Image:CarbsCD.jpg is being used on this article. 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 this Wikipedia article 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.

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 there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:08, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on RAQ. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060325033258/http://www.glidemagazine.com/articles93.html to http://www.glidemagazine.com/articles93.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:15, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on RAQ. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:22, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]