User talk:Musicfanlondon

It would be good if you could add a source or reference to your recent edit at Session musician. On a personal level, if you put something, anything, on your user page then your user name will turn from a red link to a blue link, usually seen as a positive move in an editor's evolution. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 15:11, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great. If you put something on your page, and turn it into a blue link, that can sometimes help avoid things such as the message below. Carptrash (talk) 21:06, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Paul Pacifico

Hello, Musicfanlondon. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Paul Pacifico, for deletion because it's a biography of a living person that lacks references. If you don't want Paul Pacifico to be deleted, please add a reference to the article.

If you don't understand this message, you can leave a note on my talk page.

Thanks, illogical pie (take a slice) 19:45, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Musicfanlondon, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Musicfanlondon! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Nathan2055 (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:15, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your use of multiple Wikipedia accounts

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Musicfanlondon, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:27, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse!

	Welcome to the Teahouse Badge
	Awarded to editors who have introduced themselves at the Wikipedia Teahouse. Guest editors with this badge show initiative and a great drive to learn how to edit Wikipedia. Earn more badges at: Teahouse Badges

from: Musicfanlondon

April 2013

Please do not add or change content, as you did to Session musician, without verifying it by citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 17:09, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Drmies - my apologies - it was just about my first attempt to edit a wikipedia article. I have had a bit of a trial by fire and have learned a lot over the last week or two. I feel my edit was valid but agree it was unsupported by sources - although it was deleted before I had a chance to edit it in line with your comment above. I would like to write something again on the session musician page in the near future along similar lines but this time with proper citations. I would very much appreciate it if you would be prepared to review it for me and make sure it is appropriate, valid and correct. Is this something you would consider helping with?

With thanks

Musicfanlondon (talk) 20:45, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the thing. I think I know what you want to do, and what I think you want to do you can't do. On Session musician, you can't, for instance, add a list of session musicians. A category (or set thereof) exists for musicians, Category:Session musicians by nationality, and that can (should) be added to individual biographies. Now, an association (like a union, for instance) is worth mentioning, of course, but its existence and importance need to be established with secondary sources--newspaper articles and such that discuss the organization and what it does. I hope that helps. Drmies (talk) 21:30, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - that's really useful. There has been a Wikipedia entry for The AllStars since 2007 which I wanted to flesh out and update. It unfortunately has now been proposed for deletion since I started editing it. I have had a go at establishing notability and providing sources etc - I think it is a group of musicians working together in a very innovative way and that has created a real reputation / identity in the music industry internationally as well as a loyal fan base with the public at home, but I fear I am not articulating this well or at least sufficiently to save the entry. I would be very grateful if you could take a look and let me know what you think. With thanks Musicfanlondon (talk) 23:12, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, I can't go through all the sources, but this and this don't really count as reliable, I'm afraid, and adding them only strengthens the impression that it's a non-notable outfit. You need newspapers, magazine articles, stuff like that--stuff in print. Drmies (talk) 04:38, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Specific Music

The article Specific Music has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

spam for non notable company, lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. nothing satisfying WP:CORP

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. duffbeerforme (talk) 12:39, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Paul Pacifico for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Paul Pacifico is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Blocked for sockpuppetry

This account has been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Musicfanlondon. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not. Once the block has expired, you're welcome to make useful contributions. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Rs chen 7754 20:30, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

sock puppetry - in reality...

Just a quick note to set the record straight - I wasn't actually using 2 identities - it genuinely was someone else working out of my home-office, but the whole system of appealing and working out what to do was too time-consuming and didn't feel like it was worth it. I looked up the appeals rules and there was something called 'quack's like a duck' (no really - is that an american expression?) which basically means, even if you weren't doing it, it doesn't matter if somebody thinks it looks like you were doing it...I gave up there as the whole thing seemed pointless.

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Baluji Shrivastav.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Please remember to link to the submission!
You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! The Ukulele Guy - Aggie80 (talk) 19:35, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Baluji Shrivastav, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 02:44, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The following comment was left at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Baluji Shrivastav but it will be deleted shortly as part of the history-merge discussed below:

I believe the notability requirement is met. Some clean up of grammar and tone along with filling in the Discography and this article could be accepted at a starting level. The Ukulele Guy - Aggie80 (talk) 19:39, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

For the time being, you can see the "diff" here: [1].

You may wish to improve the grammar and fill in the Discography. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 03:01, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Copy and paste moves cause extra work

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Baluji Shrivastav a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Baluji Shrivastav. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you.

I will ask an administrator to merge the histories of the older submission into the newer submission, which was recently accepted and is now at Baluji Shrivastav. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 02:49, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

January 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Baluji Shrivastav may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Members include [[Nikki Yeoh]], [[Luke Smith]], [[Mark Mondesir]], [Jim Mullen]] as well as regular collaborators [[Maceo Parker]], [[Hamish Stuart]] and [[Jocelyn Brown]].

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:51, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]