Jump to content

User talk:Ritchie333/Archive 16

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10←Archive 14Archive 15Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18→Archive 20

Musical Wikipedian

Musical Knowledge Research
Thanks for checking out my article. Yes is is totally amazing that this guy goes under the radar. He has engineered one of my favorite albums by Bruno Mars. Do you think there is enough referencing! Thanks for your help! Bco66209 (talk) 15:16, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • @Bco66209: I've added another SxSW reference, but I think my main concern at the moment is that although he was involved in the Grammy winning albums, I'm not sure if the award was specifically for him - none of the sources I checked mentioned directly. I know the Album of the Year award goes to the whole production team, but that's not what he's won. I'll get back to you! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:58, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Barton Road Swing Bridge
added links pointing to Eccles and Salford
Yellow Submarine (album)
added a link pointing to 8-track

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:33, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

A Barnstar for You!

The AFC Backlog Buster Barnstar

Congratulations, Ritchie333! You're receiving the Invisible Barnstar because you reviewed 75 articles during the recent AFC Backlog elimination drive in June 2014! Thank you for you contributions to Wikipedia at-large and helping to keep the backlog down. We hope you continue reviewing submissions and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! (t) Josve05a (c) 23:35, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Yellow Submarine (album)

The article Yellow Submarine (album) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Yellow Submarine (album) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 03:00, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Barton Road Swing Bridge

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:23, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Message for you

Hello, Ritchie333. You have new messages at Talk:Yellow Submarine (album)/GA1.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Snuggums (talk / edits) 22:01, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

@SNUGGUMS: - Hey Snuggs, I think I am allowed a weekend off for good behaviour once in a while! Katy Perry's FAC seems to be going really well doesn't it? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:04, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Of course, I was just giving a reminder about remaining queries. Her FAC is indeed going very well :3. Congrats on getting the Fab Four another GA :D! Snuggums (talk / edits) 19:58, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Overwhelmed

Richie, your review on All Saints' Church, Runcorn came before I (and the bot) could take a breath! Will you give me, say, 24 hours to give careful consideration to your comments? Maybe I shall be able to give adequate responses by then. Phew! --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 17:08, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Hi Peter. No problem. The bot's dead at the moment, otherwise you probably would have got a notification. I'm doing family stuff over the weekend, so I probably won't have a chance to look at it for a day or two as it is. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:13, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Dartford Crossing

The article Dartford Crossing you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Dartford Crossing for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Crisco 1492 -- Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:22, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

"If I Fell"

Hi, Ritchie. There's a problem with the page. Genre in the infobox is pop from cite, however, it is from the book that Chris Ingram wrote "Lennon's touching 'If I Fell'..." "...instantly seized upon by the adult pop world as new standards and covered by tuxedoed balladeers" that means not a pop song. 183.171.165.91 (talk) 02:20, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

I checked my MacDonald source and it describes it as a "ballad" with a "nursery-rhyme introduction", so "Pop" sounds right. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:13, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of You Never Give Me Your Money

The article You Never Give Me Your Money you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:You Never Give Me Your Money for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Moisejp -- Moisejp (talk) 05:02, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ritchie, congratulations on such a high profile GA. I have nominated it for DYK, here-any alternative hooks are welcome. Thanks, Matty.007 13:00, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Hmmm. The hook you've given isn't really that "gosh, I never knew that" (Not Guilty had almost three times as many takes) and I can't think of an obvious alternative at the mo. I'll leave the DYK nomination for somebody else. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:03, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Well, I'll know what to hook Not Guilty with if you get it to GA... 36 seems a lot to me as more of a lay person regarding music, is the alt any better? Thanks, Matty.007 13:07, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Let me ping @EEng: and his "rib-tickling hooks for all the family" service and see if he can spin a yarn out of it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:39, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm flattered -- see nom page. Not really a family rib-tickler, but I think it should grab the attention of aging Beatles fans, and maybe rope in a few new ones. EEng (talk) 15:05, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Jethro Tull (band)
added a link pointing to Sunbury
Revolution in the Head
added a link pointing to Richard Williams

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

You smell. Smelly. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:49, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
You think that's smelly? Try User:EEng#Computer_porn. EEng (talk) 18:57, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

The Beatles (album) has been nominated for Did You Know

He's as blind as he can be / Just sees what he wants to see

Cracking talk page discussion, Gromit!

OK? [1] EEng (talk) 18:48, 10 August 2014 (UTC) P.S. You might be amused by [2].

Fine by me - I had no idea this was up for a DYK. Since I've done things like take an article from this to this in a few weeks, I can just dismiss minor details over number formats with a vague "meh". I don't know why I thought this section title was a Van der Graaf Generator lyric instead of the Beatles when I first read it, though. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 08:58, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
Well, I just got a big lecture about changing hooks without notifying everybody including local authorities, nongovernmental organizations, and the Pope so I wanted to be sure. EEng (talk) 13:41, 11 August 2014 (UTC) P.S. Did you visit the Museum?
I think the problem is that the Pope still edits as a dynamic IP, so the {{ping}} template isn't too effective on him, plus I think he stopped editing after getting whacked by a 1RR discretionary sanctions ban on 2010 Vatican employee sex scandal. As for the "adult content" link, yesterday my (pre-teen) son found a Family Guy DVD stashed away in a cupboard and just did not understand how a cartoon could be unsuitable for kids and why he would be much better off watching The Wrong Trousers again. (Mind you, the talk page of that article has some rambling essay about the socio-political relevance, proof if it was ever required that Wikipedia is full of people with far too much time on their hands.) Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:42, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
That TWT essay... wow... it's... wow... EEng (talk) 15:24, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
The sad thing is, my kids were watching the film and wanted to know a bit more about how it was made. Off to Wikipedia, and what do we get? A summary of the plot for something they just watched, and a load of waffle about the licensing of Gromit's birthday card music. As Paxo once said, "I despair!"[3] Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:52, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
More cheese, you cunt. EEng (talk) 16:19, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
That must be in the "outtakes" section of the DVD, I'll have a look... Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:49, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
After the kids are in bed, of course. EEng (talk) 17:23, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

August 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Enmore Theatre 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:
  • Image:Enmore Theatre.JPG|250px|thumb|right|Enmore Theatre, Enmore Road]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:50, 8 August 2014 (UTC)


Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to More popular than Jesus 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:
  • |work=The Sunday Times |accessdate=2 June 2011 | date=23 November 2008 |subscription=yes}}}</ref> In [[Birmingham, Alabama]], [[WAYE|WAQY]] DJ Tommy Charles heard about the quotation from

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:38, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm getting together with Citation Bot and we're going to beat you up at playtime, and if you grass on teacher, we'll do it again after school. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:54, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Yellow Submarine (album)

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:38, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Yes Album

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Yes Album you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 20:20, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Yes Album

The article The Yes Album you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Yes Album for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 20:03, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article More popular than Jesus you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lemonade51 -- Lemonade51 (talk) 00:01, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

The article More popular than Jesus you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:More popular than Jesus for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lemonade51 -- Lemonade51 (talk) 11:02, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Tommy (album)
added links pointing to Metropolitan Opera House and SACD
Jethro Tull (band)
added a link pointing to Living In The Past

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:31, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

The Beatles (album)

Kindly explain why we need consensus for each album side beginning with track one. Radiopathy •talk• 16:10, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

See Talk:Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band#Track listing numbers. Wouldn't Third look silly with every track number being 1? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:20, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

The DYK project (nominate) 12:02, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Little Sea (Band) page

Gday thought this might be useful for your consideration - http://www.projectu.tv/little-sea-have-signed-to-universal-music-publishing-group/

Cheers! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.178.88.135 (talk) 00:28, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

That looks like a self published source which is written too much from a fan's point of view, rather than a neutral point of view. Also it says the EP hit number one - we have three sources that point to different chart positions. I'll keep looking but I think it will be at least a month or two before an article on this band sticks. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:14, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Classic rock GANs

Man, keep churning them out, I'll give some time to let others review them so it doesn't look like I'm hogging them or somehow conspiring with you, otherwise I'll jump on them soon... FunkMonk (talk) 00:33, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the support. I do want to work on different topics, but don't have the sources to hand, so just mining my old book collection (much of which came from Denmark Street's Helter Skelter) is the best help I can give to articles at the mo. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:37, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Successful FA

Thanks to your help, Katheryn Elizabeth Hudson is now a featured article :'D! Couldn't have done it without you. Snuggums (talk / edits) 02:06, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Good stuff - a well deserved FA. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:41, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Tommy (album)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Tommy (album) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of In ictu oculi -- In ictu oculi (talk) 13:20, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Greetings, Richie. Please allow me to explain why WP:INTDABLINK is necessary, even though it may look "silly" to you. Per the language set forth at Wikipedia:Disambiguation:

Links to disambiguation pages from mainspace are typically errors. In order to find and fix those errors, disambiguators generate a wide array of reports of links needing to be checked and fixed. Because these reports can not distinguish instances where an editor has made such a link with the intent to point to the disambiguation page, the community adopted the policy of rerouting all intentional disambiguation links in mainspace through "Foo (disambiguation)" redirects. This makes it clear that such links are intended to point to the disambiguation page.

Our disambiguators are battling a never-ending tide of hundreds of thousands of disambiguation links needing to be fixed. By appropriately tagging intentional links to disambiguation pages, we save disambiguators the trouble of checking the same links over and over again to see if there is an error needing to be fixed, and we make it clear to the reader that the page to which they are going when they click the link is a disambiguation page. Because it is so important to tag these links correctly, this is one of the few items at Wikipedia:Disambiguation that has been adopted as policy, and not merely a guideline. Please note also that your reversion of my edit was itself immediately reverted by a bot which has been authorized to carry out exactly this task.

I would therefore ask that in the future you not revert changes that conform intentional disambiguation links to this policy. In fact, if you come across a [[Foo]] link that intentionally points to a disambiguation page, it would be a great help if you would change this to a [[Foo (disambiguation)]] link, or a [[Foo (disambiguation)|Foo]] link; if it occurs in a hatnote such as {{for|other uses|Foo}}, you can change this to{{for|other uses|Foo (disambiguation)}} or {{for|other uses|Foo (disambiguation){{!}}Foo}}, the latter of which will leave the appearance to the reader the same, as the bot did at Tommy (album).

Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions about this policy. Cheers! bd2412 T 12:47, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

@BD2412: So if all that is the case, why does the documentation for Template:For and its cousins recommend (or at least appear to recommend) you use the stock parameters, which automatically put "disambiguation" on the end? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:44, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
The stock parameters automatically add "disambiguation" if nothing else is filled in, because then the template knows that the page you are aiming for is a disambiguation page (i.e. the same title with "disambiguation" at the end). However, when other variables are filled in, the template no longer knows this because you might be referring to a non-disambiguation page that merely happens to have a similar title. See, for example, August Wilhelm Ambros, for which the other use mentioned is not a disambiguation page at all. The template documentation evolved separately from our process of developing policies to aid in disambiguation. Of course, it should also be mentioned in the template documentation. I will update that now. Cheers! bd2412 T 13:58, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
Cool, that should sort things out. I just can't get excited about policy discussions, I'm afraid, and just tend to learn templates parrot fashion as and when I need to use them. It took me ages to master {{sfn}}, and I still can't remember all the bells and whistles on it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:03, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for The Yes Album

"Break a leg!"

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:06, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Ritchie333

You helped defend the page FundersClub for me. People that mark for speedy deletion make it truly so difficult to get any content up. I won't deny that it feels like sometimes the moderator status is abused because there is so much content that Wiki gets spammed with. Would you mind if I asked why he would have marked it for speedy deletion? It is because my account isn't older than the internet? Is it because I don't post 30 times a day and 7 days a week? I am just curious. Thank again!--DemetriusGiannopoulos (talk) 13:25, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

@DemetriusGiannopoulos: The first thing to stress is that just because your article does not meet the speedy deletion criteria, it may still be deleted by a full deletion debate, and I have recommended that the tagger, MrOllie (talk · contribs), does such an action. It doesn't obviously look like FundersClub should have a standalone article, though it may be worthy of a redirect elsewhere, depending on the quality of the WSJ and Forbes sources. Bottom line is you have sources that prove that FundersClub is real and exists, but not much else.
As far as applying the CSD criteria, opinions vary, and are discussed frequently at the CSD discussion page, but my personal criteria is that "No indication of importance" should be reserved for very very obvious things that have a blatant impossibility of ever being accepted on Wikipedia, such as "Mr Rogers is my English teacher at grade school and I love him". The principal reason I like giving articles a chance, even if it is to recommend they go to a deletion debate, is that the page creator typically learns nothing from a CSD template other than "This article is shit. Piss off." which is not really the lesson I want to give. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:36, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Pat Martino

You play the guitar right? Or piano? Check out the lines on this. Insanely difficult to learn on guitar.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:47, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

I do indeed play guitar and keyboards. And my other half has started to get coverage in reliable sources - if this carries on she (or, heaven forbid, both of us) will have an article! Yikes. Anyway, back to tricky but fun stuff, nowt wrong with a bit of Frank. And regarding Draw Me Down, I tend to work out the chords and then just jam around that, so I wouldn't play the specific notes unless the audience were expecting it. It's the ancient art of "winging it". Having just written that, it strikes me that using good taste and judgement instead of specific rules is exactly what I do round here - stuff the MOS, use common sense. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:58, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Love your singer!! I'd love to play in a band with her!! Berklee jazz guitarist graduates are usually the most intimidating ones. Kurt Rosenwinkel for instance. Just when you think you're getting good at guitar you'll hear a Martino or Rosenwinkel performance and you go back to feeling like a basic guitarist who knows bugger all again!! Some of these jazz masters play at a impossibly high level... It makes me wonder how they became so good with such an endless arrangement of ideas. It's more than practice, to have that sort of huge jazz vocabulary comes down to serious applied learning and study every day for decades. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:56, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Easy listening jazz is okay, but then you get things like this mad stuff that seems to be impossible to play at all. Still, good old Bill Bruford who's played more styles of music on drums than I can list! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:45, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Toilet-related injuries and deaths, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Victorian. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Removing tags

Hello Ritchie, it seems that you removed a CSD tag I placed. It is okay to remove CSD tags but remember to let the editor know who have added. And you asked me to "find sources" in the edit summary, remember it is your WP:BURDEN to find sources. Btw I've nominated it for Afd, feel free to join the discussion. On a seperate discussion, can you please explain your removal of other improvement tags?? Jim Carter (from public cyber) 06:22, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi. What I said in full was "send to AfD or find sources" - which you've now done. It looks like a "delete" but I want a proper scan of sources. I removed the other tags because they were (and, indeed, still are) superfluous. Not all programming languages are notable (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nemerle), but there's generally sufficient potential in any that have an audience of more than one to do a full and proper look for sources first. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 08:22, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
You should not remove improvement tags until the issues were solved. {{Refimprove}}, {{Orphan}}, {{Notability}} are actually appropriate in this particular article, 1) no sources; 2) Has less than 3 incoming links that means it is an orphan 3) Notability- since sources are not available hence notability factor. Anyway, WP:OTHERSTUFF is not a appropriate comment. Jim Carter (from public cyber) 07:10, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
The problem is, these tags say to the article's creator, "Get lost, we don't want your sort round here" and if a more important tag is on the article (in this case, AfD) then the problems can be summarised there. A {{Lead missing}} template on a one sentence non-notable stub is, well, silly! I still see "refimprove" tags from 2007, and that leads me to conclude that they are simply a way of putting wishful thinking on an article. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 08:35, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, pal!

I quoted your essay and got blocked for it. You're a dangerous man to have around. (But it suggests that the essay must be saying something right, doesn't it?) EEng (talk) 08:45, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Yikes - that wasn't a very nice thing for someone to do. You seem to have been blocked by an admin who was WP:INVOLVED against you at ANI. Anyway, I will say that I recall sitting down for an evening to find out about Phineas Gage and it was enjoyable read, irrespective of any green blobs or brown stars, and that's important to put into perspective. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:03, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
You know what they say ... "The sleep of raisins brings forth dusters”, - Francisco Loofa (talk) 09:21, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
… or was it... “The sleep of rhizomes brings forth lobsters” – Augie E. Scoffer? I can never remember, sorry...

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Who, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Common man. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, next time a diff would be nice - I can't remember which edit this was! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:43, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK for The Beatles (album)

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:03, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your help!

Hi Richie, Excited to say one article under my belt. Thank you for helping me with it. I really appreciate it. I am still going to continue to improve upon it. I wanted to ask you now that the article is created how do I get it out of my sandbox. I have another cool article I want to start working on. I hope you don't mind me asking you.

Thanks, Bco66209 (talk) 23:37, 9 September 2014 (UTC)Marissa Bco66209 (talk) 23:37, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

@Bco66209: You need to clear the text of your sandbox to re-use it, as it was redirected to the article you had been building up. I've done this for you, and it's now available for re-use at User:Bco66209/sandbox. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:21, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

September 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Tommy (album) may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"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:
  • s [[Sidney Myer Music Bowl|Myer Music Bowl]] and on 1 April at Sydney's [[Randwick Racecourse]]). Moon appeared as Uncle Ernie (in Melbourne only), [[Graham Bell (singer)|Graham Bell]] as the
  • album, and is included as the latter half of "We're not Gonna Take It".{{sfn|Atkins|2000|p=282}}}}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:15, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

So

Hello, I recently got Peter Gabriel's 1986 album So up to GA, and I have now nominated it to be peer reviewed with a view to taking it to FA, and was wondering whether you could offer some comments? I know you have experience in rock albums/BLPs (not sure if Genesis/Gabriel is your thing), but you might be able to see if I'm mising anything obvious. I can, of course, return the favour with The Who. Feel free to leave this if your hands are tied! Best, —JennKR | ☎ 16:14, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Jenn. I have been preoccupied with things like making sure I get the right present for my eldest son's birthday, but I will hopefully have some time free soon to look at it. I remember So when it first came out, and I do quite like Genesis, though more from the Selling England by the Pound. Gabriel deserves good credit for transcending that to the extent that nobody remembers him doing that sort of thing anymore. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 07:27, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Tommy (album)

The article Tommy (album) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Tommy (album) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 15:43, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Are you deaf, dumb and blind (if you'll pardon the pun), Legobot? It just passed! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:30, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Weird, maybe it confused it with when you reset the page? FunkMonk (talk) 16:44, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 23 September

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mersea Island, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pillbox. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Comment on edit war

Hi. You were so kind to review the article Shades of Deep Purple for GA status. Now User:Radiopathy started an edit war about track listing formatting on the article. It would be greatly appreciated if you could give your opinion on the matter at Talk:Shades of Deep Purple Lewismaster (talk) 14:11, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

"Oh no, not again" is my initial reaction, but just take care as the pair of you are both on 3 reverts, so if either one of you changes the track listing again, you may breach WP:3RR. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:36, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Editor's Barnstar
Well done for your fine work on The Who. I keep seeing your name come up on my watchlist. You always seem to be making good edits to articles, and I find your contributions to the recent BLP sourcing discussions very clueful as well. Keep up the good work. John (talk) 19:49, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, John. As a seasoned FA stalwart yourself, that means high praise indeed. The Who will go to FAC when it is good and ready and I can't think of a single thing left to do, but not before. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:05, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Shaun Foist comments

Greetings... I appreciate your feedback. I am gathering that editing the existing page for Mr. Foist is more desirable than trying to resubmit the one that I created. It seems absurd that so much of the content on Wiki is 'subjective' - for instance, a page on former breaking benjamin drummer, Chad Szlinga is free form conversational through much of it with no cited references on a good part of it, talking about rumors, being the self appointed goodwill ambassador during Ben Burnley's illness - yet no documented evidence via any 'reliable sources' to substantiate various claims. It reads like a personal opinion about one's self vs. a document in the third person. Also, with links going to non-existent or removed content, it appears to be a page that should be flagged for serious errors - yet it stands with no questions for review - which can only lead one to believe that there are different sets of rules for different 'noted individuals' on Wikipedia. For those of us who actually have to work really hard at what we do for our artists, which means doing as much as possible in a WYSIWYG manner, the convoluted HTML hell that IS Wikipedia is a pure nightmare for those of us who legitimately need to have these things in place for our noted artists - and have little to no time learning the in's and out's of this platform. So basically - color me frustrated. I spent weeks on the content I submitted - all for nothing. I don't even know where to go from here - and don't have much if any time left to go through this painful experience again. Thank you for permitting the space to vent - I can't believe I am alone in this WikiTruthTime (talk) 23:44, 25 September 2014 (UTC) WikiTruthTime

@WikiTruthTime: - I need to make a couple of important points. Firstly, there are millions of articles on Wikipedia, and an article may simply be in poor shape (as Chad Szeliga was until recently) because nobody had looked it. There aren't different standards, it's just that with so many articles and editors, even enforcement is near impossible. Now some longer standing editors have had a look and trimmed out all the unsourced content. In general, if you believe content is unverifiable as being correct (due to either no source, or a bad quality source such as a blog or a tabloid newspaper), you are normally on solid grounds in removing it, provided in the edit summary, you say so. Although a far better course of action is to cite the information to a good quality source, if you can. Because your draft didn't have much sourcing, anyone could have removed your content on the same ground.
I can't argue against your opinions of the user interface. Indeed, though I have been editing Wikipedia for nearly ten years, much of the activity has come in the last two or three after I heard too many real life complaints about the place and decided to do something about it. There are projects such as Visual Editor that are supposed to improve the editing process, but I frankly wouldn't hold your breath in their widespread approval and deployment. Personally I think there is a market for paid professional Wikipedia editors, who understand the technical nature of the user interface and the myriad of policies and guidelines (without my involvement, Bullets and Daffodils and Rockie Charles would not exist on WP), but paid editing has such a stigma (generally from the paid editors being poorly experienced and / or having a huge conflict of interest), that it's hard to get such a proposal taken seriously.
Finally, you may find your username is a handicap on Wikipedia as the word "truth" is a common feature for editors wishing to push a particularly point of view. Consider requesting a username change. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:41, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
@Ritchie333: - point well taken on the name - but the instructions even there on how to change it are WAY too complicated to follow. Apparently the 'point and click and type' world will never exist here. Thank you for trying to help, but......... I give up. Also being flagged without warrant as being incapable of being unbiased on the subject matter due to my proximity to the subject matter? I'm a professional writer and I know the difference between facts and being gratuitous. I DO know for a fact that many of the docs here on Wiki with regard to professional entertainers and bands have been written by their handlers. That's just the way it is. The 'ass-umption' (deliberate hyphenation) on the part of whomever inserted that little tidbit on my draft without facts or 'references' to back up that statement regarding my ability to be objective is beyond offensive --- but it's not your fault, so please do not take offense. You seem to have a handle on the insanity better than most. Thank you again for trying to be helpful - but as mentioned, I'm a writer - a very frustrated writer with this situation... - not a computer programmer, unfortunately. WikiTruthTime (talk) 00:18, 29 September 2014 (UTC) WikiTruthTime
@WikiTruthTime: I can probably sort out a username change if you want one. I would universally recommend that all Wikipedians have a life outside of Wikipedia, and you seem to have this. Being on here 24/7 will mean you are blind to how the rest of the world sees and works. See my essay on Hit and run editors about what I think of people who tag first and ask questions later. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:25, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

A few things

Hey Ritch, thanks for entering the GA Cup. Just one note–you need to update the count at the GA submissions so the delegates can award you points for the review on Brothers and Sisters. And another one–can you check whether Megadeth is eligible for WP:MILLION? I brought it to FA a couple of months ago and wanted to see if I can get one of those accolades. Have a nice day.--Retrohead (talk) 06:57, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

I just checked the stats page, and multiplying the previous 90 day figure by (365 / 90) only gives you 804,756 annual viewers. Sorry :-( I'll put Brothers and Sisters on the list when the review's finished. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:13, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Well then, can I at least get the half million barnstar?--Retrohead (talk) 14:45, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Who, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brian Bennett. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

I demand a requested move! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:18, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

From Elvis In Memphis

Thanks for taking the review. There's only a few issues, so I guess this will be a quick one.--GDuwenTell me! 16:51, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Well I've put quite a few WP:ALBUMS/500 articles up for GA myself, so the least I can do is return the favour to someone else. Have to nip out in a mo, but I suspect this'll be passed without too much trouble. I wonder if it's worth pinging @Miniapolis:, who did large scale copyediting a while back, to get his point of view on things? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:18, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
All done, it's ready for a second look now. If Miniapolis wants to get into this, the more, the merrier!--GDuwenTell me! 18:04, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Tommy (album)

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:02, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

GA Cup -Round 1 Newsletter

WikiProject Good Articles's 2014-15 GA Cup - Round 1

As we move into the middle of Round 1, we wanted to report some of the lessons we've learned thus far, as well as announce a major rule change going into Round 2, which begins November 1. Remember, sign-ups for this year's Cup ends on September 15.

Thus far, we're very happy with the results of the competition. One of our major goals, reducing the long backlog at GAN, is well on the way to being accomplished, mostly due to the enthusiastic efforts of Jonas Vinther, who has earned over 250 points. Over 80 reviews have been made thus far. Thank you all for your efforts and for your part in making the GA Cup a success.

However, this is the inaugural year of the GA Cup, so there have been some unforeseen circumstances that have come up. One has been a glaring inadequacy with the rules, which the judges feel makes the competition unfair. As a result, there will be a major change in the rules, starting at the beginning of Round 2:

  • Your review must provide feedback/suggestions for improvement, and then you must wait until the nominator has responded and all issues/suggestions have been resolved before you can pass the article. Failure to follow this rule will result in disqualification.

What this means is that you must provide some feedback to the article's nominator, and must wait for him or her to respond before passing the article. If the nominator has not responded in the standard 7 days, you can fail the article. We're instituting this rule change to prevent the possibility of competitors passing articles for the sake of passing articles (or failing them) and to gain more points. We believe that the change will make it more fair to all competitors in the GA Cup.

Also, in case you haven't noticed, we increased the "guarantee" for Round 2 to 25 participants. The exact number will be decided in the near future.

We thank your for your participation, and for your flexibility and understanding as we learn what works and what doesn't work in this competition.

Cheers from NickGibson3900, Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan.

To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:26, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ritchie333/Archive_16&oldid=1089135858"