User talk:BRG/Archive 2007
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:BRG. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 2000 | ← | Archive 2005 | Archive 2006 | Archive 2007 |
Columbia catalog number
You removed the {{verification needed}} tag on the Columbia catalog number for Que Sera, Sera (diff) with the edit summary "deleted request for verification on catalog number; it's rather certain!" The tag was placed there last fall because internet searches at the time failed to find it. Where is it? Athænara ✉ 19:59, 13 January 2007 (UTC) Whoops! Sorry, I hadn't seen your post on the Que Sera talk page (diff). —Æ. ✉ 20:03, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
invitation
|
You are invited to join the Homeopathy WikiProject,
a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Homeopathy. Please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Don't delay---the first 25 members will receive this beautfiul toaster |
Abridged talk 20:05, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Huntington, Florida, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (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. Dreamafter 19:35, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Maybe You'll Be There, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Wǐkǐɧérṃǐť(Talk) 19:21, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
- Non notable. Wǐkǐɧérṃǐť(Talk) 19:50, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Glad I could help. I think the editor who tagged the article was mostly just inexperienced with Wikipedia's deletion process. The article really could use sourcing, though, especially now that it gives specific numbers for the song's stay on the Billboard chart. —Celithemis 00:33, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Re: Date preferences
I didn't simply change links "<year> in music" to "<year>". I was doing that only for full dates, for example: [[February 17]] [[1958 in music|1958]] → [[February 17]], [[1958]] in order to allow reader's preferences to work as per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) and Wikipedia:Piped link. I realize that the issue of date preferences is confusing even for experienced editors and I'm sorry that my bot's edit summary wasn't more informative. The bot's user page contained better explanation with links to relevant guidelines, though. It isn't there anymore because it was quite a long time ago and I no longer make this change due to some concerns that few editors had. Regards, Jogers (talk) 08:00, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
James van Heusen
Would you mind if I moved James Van Heusen to Jimmy Van Heusen? He was born Chester Babcock, and Van Heusen was his stage name, and everyone knows him as Jimmy :) Gareth E Kegg 15:05, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- It's been done! Gareth E Kegg 16:46, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Re:Young Love
Hi, sorry for a late reply but at the time when i moved "Young Love (1956 song)" to "Young Love (Sonny James song)" at the time the article stated "The original version was recorded by Sonny James."[1] I have never heard the song before so I had no idear, I was only trying to put it into format using Wikipedia:Naming conventions. Lillygirl 02:36, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Song naming
Hi! I ran into one of your edits on P.O.D., an article I watch. There may be more recent discussion I'm unaware of, but according to WikiProject Songs, song article names are generally disambiguated by artist, not year. I cleaned up Goodbye for Now (P.O.D. song), but I'm not sure what the best specifier for the Reds song is (since it was written by a prominent composer and recorded by several prominent artists). For now, I replaced the link in the Perry Como article with Goodbye for Now (Stephen Sondheim song). It's not perfect, but I felt it was closer to the naming convention. Just thought I'd let you know. --Fru1tbat 13:29, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Songwriter and lyricist categories
Hello, I have been running into a lot of song articles you created as I work on populating the new Category:Vocal duets. I notice that a lot of them have categories such as "Songs written by (blank)", which appear as redlinks because nothing has been entered on the category page. It would be very helpful if you would eliminate the redlinks by immediately adding relevant overarching categories such as Category:Songs by songwriter and Category:Songs by lyricist to the new category's page. Another element that can be added is the template {{catmore2|Article name}}, which adds the text For more information, see the article about Article name to the category page.
I am amazed by the number of song, songwriter and performer articles you have created. Thank you for your many contributions! InnocuousPseudonym 06:36, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply, and I just wanted to say I totally agree with you on the parallelism issue (though I see nothing wrong with the phrasing "Songs by composer"). InnocuousPseudonym 19:59, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- I will do that, and thanks for the heads up. But what are the supercategories now? Has [[Category:Songs by composer]] been created? Like many editors I have been swamped trying to respond to User:BetacommandBot's requests for Fair Use Rationales, and I wasn't around to see the final outcome of the category debate. InnocuousPseudonym 19:43, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
- Glad to hear it. I will add any that I run across to the supercategories. InnocuousPseudonym 20:07, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
- The categories look good now; I take it it ended ok from your POV? Johnbod 22:58, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Anti-conlang bias
Greetings BRG! Yes, I've spotted an anti-conlang bias as well. My sense is that there's almost a determination by a few editors to rid Wikipedia of conlangs, except for a few of the most prominent. Unfortunately, I think many of the editors on the Interlingua article have been chased away, so several of the people who would have voted in these discussions aren't on Wikipedia. The Interlingua Coollist article was apparently nominated for speedy deletion moments after it was written. On checking the Ceqli discussion, though, I think the article will be kept, and I'm glad to see that. I also looked at your adminship discussion, and it does seem that an anti-conlang bias was the main hindrance to your nomination.
On the Folkspraak article, it looked to me like there was no consensus and the article should have been kept by default. The article was lengthy, and it may not be possible to recreate it. On the plus side, I'm sure a new Folkspraak article will be written, and it may be more concise and do a better job of supporting notability. (Stating notability in so many words is ordinarily considered bad writing, but you almost have to state it at Wikipedia so that someone doesn't miss it and nominate the article for deletion!) Cal 03:00, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Deletion of categories Songs introduced by Fred Astaire/Frank Sinatra
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 July 8 Could you help out here? Gareth E Kegg 23:15, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Request for help at CfD
Category:Duke Ellington was recently put on the chopping block over at Categories for Discussion. I spent a bunch of time populating its subcategories including Category:Compositions by Duke Ellington, Category:Songs with music by Duke Ellington, Category:Compositions by Billy Strayhorn and Category:Duke Ellington Orchestra members and think the parent category contributes significantly to their navigability by tying them all together. If you have a chance to take a look at the "debate" over here and agree with any of my arguments I would greatly appreciate it if you voiced your support. InnocuousPseudonym 04:55, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
DC Meetup notice
Greetings. There is going to be a Washington DC Wikipedia meetup on next Saturday, July 21st at 5pm in DC. Since you are listed in Category:Wikipedians_in_Maryland, I thought I'd invite you to come. I'm sorry about the short notice for the meeting. Hopefully we'll do somewhat better in that regard next time. If you can't come but want to make sure that you are informed of future meetings be sure to list yourself under "but let me know about future events", and if you don't want to get any future direct notices \(like this one\), you can list yourself under "I'm not interested in attending any others either" on the DC meetup page.--Gmaxwell 00:26, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
Songs songs songs...
Is there any place that we could inform each other of song articles that we've recently created? It would help us both with interlinking, and little clean ups! I've recently created "It's All Right With Me"/"Don't Worry 'Bout Me"/"Until the Real Thing Comes Along"/"I Wish I Were in Love Again"/"I Concentrate on You", and others...Gareth E Kegg 15:23, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
External links to song lyrics
I reverted your restoration of the external link to the lycrics of My Shining Hour as per Wikipedia policy Wikipedia:External_links#Restrictions_on_linking as the site thepeaches.com is not licensed to host these lyrics. Thank you. D7240 10:24, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
WKAV/WELK
Actually, WKAV was WELK-AM back in the 50's. The FCC Call Sign History page says they were WELK-AM until 1980 when they switched to WXAM until 1984 when they became WKAV. Here is the link. Where I got the 1957 date, though, is from 100000watts.com, where they list when the station started regardless of call letters then or now.
WELK-FM in Elkins was launched in 1982, but the first application was sent in in 1981. So, they came on after WKAV-AM switched to WXAM. I am not sure if they shared owners or not (I was born in '81, so I was only 0) but it doesn't say anything in the FCC records, but that doesn't always mean anything.
Please let me know if you need further help, as I am glad to lend a hand. Take Care and Enjoy the Rest of your Weekend....NeutralHomer T:C 23:26, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
I Like Classic Track Formatting!
Why did you change the track format at I Like Men!? It makes it harder to edit, and few other albums are as such. I don't think it falls under the style guidelines of Wikiproject albums either. Gareth E Kegg 15:38, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Proposed revision of Template:Pop song 2
I wrote a proposal to modify the Pop song 2 template at Template talk:Pop song 2. Please let me know if it is acceptable to you. InnocuousPseudonym 07:19, 25 August 2007 (UTC) I replied over at the talk page linked above. The gist is I really liked your compromise proposal. InnocuousPseudonym 20:51, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
Notability of Paul Gordon (musician)
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Paul Gordon (musician), by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Paul Gordon (musician) seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, 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 assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Paul Gordon (musician), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot 17:34, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Question
On your site, wikia:broadcasting, do you have full length pages like here on Wikipedia? Take Care and Have a Good Extended Weekend....NeutralHomer T:C 05:50, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Release Me
Hi. Per WP:SONGS, songs should not be disambiguated by putting the year in the article title. I moved "Release Me (1990 song)" to "Release Me (song)". However, if you insist that this be disambiguated further, it should be moved to "Release Me (Wilson Phillips song)". - eo 21:13, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
- For songs in the last few decades I don't see a problem with placing the original artist's name in the article title, however for songs from pre-1950s, etc. I do agree with you about putting a year in the article title.... the music industry then was definitely more of a songwriter's business than a singer's business.... aren't there still many articles from that era with the year still in the article title? I didn't think there was any dispute about that, but I could be wrong. I swear I've seen some with the songwriter's name in the article title instead of the year. I suppose I don't have an issue with that either. Don't remember which ones they are, tho... - eo 17:47, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Tramps
On 7th August "The Lady is a Tramp" was moved to "This Lady Is a Tramp", after little discussion by User:Yip1982. What do you think? They say it is the original title, yet the ibdb disagrees, [2] as do the many readings by Frank/Tony/Mel/Sammy and Buddy Greco, and Ella, who should be the one using "This" if anyone... Gareth E Kegg 16:57, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi BRG, I noticed you moved "Mean to Me" by Crowded House to "Mean to Me (1986 song)". I was wondering if you could explain why this was done? The original page was simply redirecting to the other page, making for an unnecessary redirect. I reverted the move, however can restore your move if you can provide an adequate reason for this move (i.e. another song named "Mean to Me", in which case the correct disambiguation this song, as per WP:SONGS would be to use the band name as the variable, not the year of release, unless the group has more than one song of that name). Please respond here as I'm watching your talk page now. --lincalinca 22:16, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- There certainly is another song "Mean to Me" -- far more notable than your "Crowded House" song. It is a popular/jazz standard, "Mean to Me" with music by Fred E. Ahlert and lyrics by Roy Turk, published in 1929. I always disambiguate by year, not by artist, because the rule in WP:SONGS is absolutely stupid! Almost none of the songs that I am concerned with was recorded by only one artist; most of them have been recorded by dozens. In many cases, multiple versions made the charts. I would like to engage someone in dialog about this absolutely ridiculous convention, but none of my attempts to initiate discussion has brought a reply. -- BRG 13:24, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Remember (1933 song) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, 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 assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} 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 confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.
For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Icestorm815 19:43, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
- I would just like to say that the article nominated might not state why it is important/significant. Please note that this is different from notability. If you still want to keep the article, please don't forget to explain your reasoning in the article's discussion page. Icestorm815 20:20, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Charles Abbott (songwriter)
A tag has been placed on Charles Abbott (songwriter), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Brewcrewer 04:37, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Help!
Talk:I Didn't Know About You Gareth E Kegg 13:58, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
- Crisis over, it'll happen again soon though, I'm sure. Gareth E Kegg 16:28, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Geoffrey Claremont Parsons, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason: No assertion of notability.
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.
For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.
Also, I can find no verifiable sources for this. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 14:30, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
DC meetup #3
Interested in meeting-up with a bunch of your wiki-friends? Please take a quick look at Wikipedia:Meetup/DC 3 and give your input about the next meetup. Thank you.
This automated notice was delivered to you because you are on the Wikipedia:Meetup/DC/Invite. BrownBot 01:12, 1 November 2007 (UTC)