User talk:Laynethebangs

Albert Hammond, Jr.'s second album

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Albert Hammond, Jr.'s second album, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{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. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Muéro^(talk/c) 03:16, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From Wikipedia's official rules, the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. Real, credible sources must be provided. YouTube and Flickr are not appropriate sources. In general, the most reliable sources are peer-reviewed journals and books published in university presses; university-level textbooks; magazines, journals, and books published by respected publishing houses; and mainstream newspapers. It wouldn't matter if Albert Hammond, Jr., has been your best friend your entire life, and he swore on his mother's grave that the information you provided was true. You need to have good sources like a newspaper, magazine, or official website, not myspace, YouTube, Flickr, etc. Also, there's no point creating an article that cannot exist for very long (it will just have to be moved once it gets a title, which it should, if it's coming out any time soon). If he really does have an album coming out, Rolling Stone, or MTV, or his record label, or someone will have real information on it soon enough. If every artist has an article for their theoretical next album, half of Wikipedia would just be unnamed future albums with no credible sources. So please add the {{db-author}} tag to Albert Hammond, Jr.'s second album and wait for real information about it, not speculation. --Muéro^(talk/c) 18:19, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to delete the page. Fans should have a chance to hear about his new album. And for the record, his myspace IS his official website, and the blog is his official blog. That's how he posts his news. You wanted sources, I gave you sources. The youtube video contains an interview with Albert conducted by an official news group in Europe where he talks about his new album. That's where I got some of the information from. I couldn't link the actual blog because myspace blogs are linked as spam. The flickr photos showed his new songs actually existed. If you're not happy with that, fine. I made that page for the fans who want information on the album, and if you're not overjoyed at the news of a new album enough to want to spread that word to other people, are you even a fan of his then? You removed the spectulation I'd put on the page. I agree with that. I think that helps the page. Also, when the new album title comes out, that page will just redirect to it, that just happened with the Hives new album and no one complained about that article. But let me say again, I will not delete that page.

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

Laynethebangs (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

74.73.184.201 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Block message:

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Bringbackscrubsepisodepages". The reason given for Bringbackscrubsepisodepages's block is: "disruptive SPA, username violates WP:U".

Blocking administrator: Coredesat (talk • blocks)

Decline reason: After reviewing your edit history, it seems likely that you have been using sockpuppet accounts disruptively, which our rules do not permit. The autoblock has done what it is supposed to do and blocked you when your sockpuppets were blocked. — FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:34, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 01:07, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Centralized TV Episode Discussion

Over the past months, TV episodes have been reverted by (to name a couple) TTN, Eusebeus and others. No centralized discussion has taken place, so I'm asking everyone who has been involved in this issue to voice their opinions here in this centralized spot, be they pro or anti. Discussion is here [1]. --Maniwar (talk) 19:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Albert Hammond, Jr.'s second album

An editor has nominated Albert Hammond, Jr.'s second album, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Albert Hammond, Jr.'s second album and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 18:59, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to Arctic Monkeys' third studio album

Please see the talk page. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 15:24, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Secret Machines

Hello, are you the same person who added this change previously? And if so, have you seen the response I left on the anon IP's talk page? Future albums should not go in the discography section, but can be mentioned in band's history, where there is already an entire section about it. The other person making this edit (if it wasn't you) is upset that I reverted his change, but I can't tell if he is seeing my replies and explanation. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 23:24, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Brendan Benson's Fourth Solo Record

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Brendan Benson's Fourth Solo Record, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Album fails WP:CRYSTAL and WP:V without even an official title, firm release date, or confirmed track listing.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent 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.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, 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. • Gene93k (talk) 15:40, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Original research

go and watch the sketch on hulu is not a satisfactory answer. reliable sources requires a third party source, not somebody going and doing original research by watching a broadcast. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 02:31, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:34, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]