User talk:Talemir

10,000 Days

Hi, there --

I appreciate your attempts to help out at the article for Tool's 10,000 Days, but what you added -- lyrics interpretations -- is not the sort of thing we can include in an encyclopedia article. Please see What Wikipedia is not for more information. We need everything in Wikipedia to be verifiable, meaning that a reliable source must already have published the information we include. Also, original research -- such as your own opinions regarding a song's meaning -- is not allowed, either.

I hope you stick around at Wikipedia! We're glad to have you. Dylan 13:54, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dylan, I'm sorry to tell you, but in black and white, that is bull shit. Listen to the damn song and even if it is not true, I expressed the fact that it is MY OPINION NOT FACT! You wana see something horrible? Look up Final Fantasy 7's Sephiroth and tell me that's all "true" I can proove 90 things on that page to be WRONG! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Talemir (talk • contribs) 14:02, 6 May 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Well, I'm afraid that's the way it is at Wikipedia. If there are factual errors at Sephiroth, feel free to fix them -- by citing reliable sources to support your changes. Please read the links I provided above to get a sense for Wikipedia's policies regarding what can and cannot be included. Dylan 14:13, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I understand I read the rules. I appologize but I was just upset after all that work, just went to waste lol. And if you listen to Vicarious you can even see for yourself that the lyrics are in black and white. But what if I were to just post the lyrics themselves would that be ok? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Talemir (talk • contribs) 09:55, 6 May 2006

I must appologize again lol, I went to look at the page about Sephiroth and it wasn't the same page I came across, I don't know what I found the one day, but it had words labeling him as cunt, and Lucrecia was nowhere to be found in reference. Nor was vincent or the fact that Jenova was simply an organizm. Maybe it was reverted just as my post was. But it looks to be fine now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Talemir (talk • contribs) 10:09, 6 May 2006

I know what you mean -- it takes a while to get a hang of what goes in here and what doesn't. Lyrics actually cannot be posted either, but that's a copyright issue -- the band holds that copyright and so we can't reproduce it here (although snippets of lyrics are okay, if they're used in context).

By the way, please sign your posts on talk pages by adding "~~~~" when you're done writing. Dylan 16:17, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh ok, so I will post something I'm pretty sure is valuable information in a bit on the tool website. If you decide it isn't and is non factual you can remove it and I won't say anything lol! --Talemir 16:47, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I gotcha, I just hit the signiture button I thought that did it. I will just use the four tidles from now on. I added the info to the page hope it's correct and not too much. Should I do ~~~~ on there too?

Talemir 17:05, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dylan help! lol. I can't seem to embed this image! what's the proper code for embeding a picture off another page? Talemir 17:14, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The only images that can appear on Wikipedia are ones that have been uploaded to Wikipedia's servers -- you can't embed an image that rests at someone else's website. To upload an image, click (on the side bar) "Upload file" -- be aware that there are lots of copyright issues surrounding images. Not all images can come to Wikipedia. For more, see Wikipedia:Images and Wikipedia:Uploading images.

You only need to ~~~~ on Talk pages for articles and users (like this one) -- don't sign your posts in the actual content of the article. Dylan 17:40, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I'm being more carefull with the copywrite stuff now lol. Btw check out unseen vision I just created it! Don't worry, ti's all try and you can cite it off the main site, I plan to add all the appropriate info in a minte, thanks for your help man you're a cool guy :) Talemir 18:47, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unseen Vision

I would like to recommend addressing the issue of the notability of Unseen Vision before continuing to edit it. It would be rather unpleasant to have worked on it to such an extent and then to have it be deleted, if that is what ends up happening. --Iapetus^TALK|C|@ 00:30, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talemir, there are a number of problems with your article on your band, Unseen Vision.

Firstly, while the world appreciates your contribution to modern music, Wikipedia only tends to contain articles on notable bands and artists. Unfortunately, Unseen Vision, along with other local bands that have not made a significant or unique contribution that is of particular interest to anyone besides the band themselves, are often removed from Wikipedia. For more information on what is considered notable, please see Wikipedia:Notability (music), Wikipedia:Importance, and most importantly, Wikipedia:Notability.
Please review the meaning of discography, because there is a clear contradiction between the subtitle in your article and your saying, and I quote:

No official CD is released yet, as of late it is still in the process of being mixed and mastered.

Note that the origin of the word discography is the gramophone record, often called a "disc", which is now in standard Compact Disk format.

Also note the purpose of linking within Wikipedia: When writing an article, if you believe that the general viewing population may be unfamiliar with a term you are using, it is often useful to use an internal link. However, it is counter productive when you overlink an article, which you have done by linking to words of common definition and linking the same word more than once in an article. For example, if an article is lengthy, it may be helpful to link the same key term in multiple sections, but in a short article it is best to only link the first occurence of the word.
Also note that "Progressive Jazz Metal" is not a new type of music. Before claiming that this band is planning anything original or notable, do a quick Wikipedia search for the term. You would soon find that Progressive Metal has roots in Progressive Rock, which does share roots with Jazz. An example of notable progressive metal bands are Dream Theatre and Liquid Tension Experiment.
Do not sign articles. You sign talk pages for the purpose of letting everyone else know who is sharing the opinion, but articles are supposed to be strictly factual.
A quick click on the "Random article" link on the left-hand menu will take you to any article that most likely contains formatting examples. Please note that you do not have to indent each paragraph in articles.

With all the above information in mind, if you feel that there is any reason to keep the article here other than self promotion, please post your reasons here, in what is known as a talk page. Of course, if there is any reason to keep information on an unheardof local band that is poorly written, then please make the corrections above, otherwise this article may very well be considered for deletion.

As a side note, please be careful when editing information regarding notable bands, such as your recent contributions to Tool's 10,000 Days page.

Please be reasonable. Thank you. SeanBerwick 00:36, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your concenr Iapetus, and SeanBerwick. I read up on the guidlines and they do make sense, but I did however notice that there it says

Conntains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable; note that it is often most appropriate to use redirects in place of articles on side projects, early bands and such.

If it helps in the matter or not, their current drummer D'ronn use to be the drummer for the "The Penny Royals", who are in fact signed; I however do not know if the Penny Royals are themself in fact notable. If there is any thing I can in fact do to keep this up, then that would be great. If not? It is not a big deal, simply let me know that it will be removed and I will copy & paste all the work I have done and it will be saved for a later date. =)

I also know of Dream Theater and Liquid Tension Experiment, I simply did not know that when he said "Progressive Jazz Metal" that it wasn't a new type of music. I will remove that at once, and if you want, I will remove all external links and keep it at a simple information based article. I am new to this site and I am still learning the coding along with the guidlines, I appologize in advance for any errors I have made. Thank you for your patience.

Talemir 00:45, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you can determine that The Penny Royals are notable, based on the guidelines mentioned above (most notably "Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable)."), and can then make that connection in Unseen Vision, then it could merit staying, though not necessarily ("the meeting of any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept" - from WP:MUSIC). --Iapetus^TALK|C|@ 00:56, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Although even if the notability issue is resolved there is still a problem of:

Not a soapbox: It is helpful not to create articles about or relating to some aspect of the author. Basically, don't create personal articles because NPoV is always disputed.
Not a social networking site: As this link suggests, this information would be better placed in your user page.

SeanBerwick 01:02, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok so in other words, if I make the connection that The Penny Royals meat the criteria above, and the connection that D'ronn was once their drummer, and provide a NPOV, then the article can stay? Als how do I go about making it 3rd party verfiable? How do I go about doing that in the actual article? Thank you again for your help kindness and patience.

Talemir 01:07, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as I just mentioned, you should not really post about your own band because NPoV is always disputed, and the only way around that other than trying to "sound" neutral is to cite sources. Citations include mention in newspapers, magazines, etc., the things you would find in a bibliography. Even though you may know all the information for a fact because it happened to you personally, it does have to somehow be proven.

As far as the connection with The Penny Royals, they don't have a Wikipedia article. This does not mean they are not notable, however the typical format for this situation is to create an article for the notable band (putting factual information in that article), and then linking to Unseen Vision in a side-projects portion of The Penny Royals' article. This is just my suggestion, but the main reason is that you claim the notability of this band resides in The Penny Royals, according to Wiki policy, but if they had their own article, The Penny Royals' article would have to prove that it is a notable band as well.

SeanBerwick 01:19, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did a little thinking, and it has come to my attention that in fact I may very well be the 3rd party?

I mean I was in the band at one point in time but I left, I was involved but the reasons I left were because I did not like where the music was going. To put it simply, I'm sick in bed for quite a while (Not asking for sympathy, just a point / fact). I get bored and I've used this site for information for a long time and I take pride in finally being a part of it. I saw the opportunity to create an article about something I in fact knew and do know a lot about because I was involved. But if it truely has to go then just say the word. I do however understand the rules and laws in this site, you guys are deffinetely very serious about your work and I understand that is why the site is what it is today. I will do whatever possible to try and dig up some info on the Penny Royals and see if they meet the notable criteria, I have already removed the external links, and I shall be looking for that one credible external link that will let the article stay, hell I'll even make the Penny Royals an article haha. I wasn't even involved with them except opening up for them. But in lamen terms since it's late and I am tired, get credable info, post as external link, where? lol

Talemir 01:30, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Advertising on user page

Hi Talemir. Welcome to Wikipedia. If you have not done so already, could you please read WP:UP, this describes what is and is not allowed on user-pages. Advertising for Wikipedia unrelated services on your user-page appears to be against this guideline. A1kmm 03:17, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear, sorry about that, I will remove it at once. I'm still getting use to all the restrictions since I am used to myspace.com (Sorry if that is also advertising, you may remove it). What about "I run a buisness for a phone company, if you're interested contact me?" Well, that would still be advertising still wouldn't it? Haha. Ok I will remove all of that info. I did however add some info to junk mail and bulk mail, let me know if those are ok. I think I'm just going to stick to the basic rule of "Only write what you know to be true." kinda rule lol. Thank's for informing me.

Talemir 03:29, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I have tagged the article Unseen Vision for speedy deletion as, per the discussion above, there is no assertion of notability according to WP:MUSIC. It seems highly unlikely (though not impossible) that any of the members previous bands were notable enough to merit this one staying. If you have evidence otherwise then follow the instructions on the tag. Thanks. Rockpocket (talk) 20:24, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just found out the The Penny Royals are under Corporate Punishment Records, which is notable on wikipedia, along with CBGB's. And since the drummer used to be their drummer. And it clearly states;

Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable; note that it is often most appropriate to use redirects in place of articles on side projects, early bands and such.

I STRONGLY disagree with speedy deletion.

Please look into the discussion on the articles page as well. Vincent 20:28, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, i just noticed the discussion on the talk page. I have removed the tag since notability has been asserted. However, i still don't buy that the The Penny Royals are notable enough that so that the future project of their drummer deserves attention. I expect a prod tag will be contested also, so i'm going to take this right to WP:AFD and we can let the community decide. Rockpocket (talk) 20:31, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I understand and I appretiate you looking further into it before leaving the tag up. AS I have mentioned before, I understand the rules here, and I am simply just trying to provide information for the future in advanced. I have removed 'ALL' external links that would lead to advertising, and cited in the article that the Penny Royals are signed and possibly a notable band to link to. But if the information provied (or that can be obatined) to provide evidence that the band Unseen Vision is in fact notable, then I will proved such informatnion. But if not, simply allow me time to cut and paste the info so I may post it up in the future when the band becomes notable. And if WP:AFD deems it uncitable, and a NPOV. Then I will take it down and delete it myself, thank you for understanding.

Vincent 20:38, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD will take a week or so before anything is decided. So you should have plenty of time to save the text. Keep and eye on the votes and you will begin to get an idea of whether it will be deleted or not. Please feel free to argue your case at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unseen Vision. Vote Keep (should you wish to) then explain why you believe the article to be notable in terms of WP:MUSIC. I appreciate you have acted in good faith, so please do not take personally the fact that I AfD'd it. I just don't think the band is quite there yet. As you say, in future they may be and then the article would be most welcome (indeed in the meantime, you may wish to move it to your user page, should you prefer). Thanks again for being so reasonable. Rockpocket (talk) 20:46, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is very true, and don't worry, I don't take it personal. I shall bring all points over to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unseen Vision also, thank you for informing me of this article.

Vincent 21:20, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tags

Hi Vincent, You asked about which image tag to use. That is one area of Wikipedia that confuses me also. As far as i can tell the best tag for you is: {{cc-by-nd}}—Creative Commons No Derivative Works. It permits others to copy, distribute, and display only verbatim copies of the work, not derivative works based upon it. If you add this tag (including both sets of "{{") to the summary, i think that should cover what you want. Hope that helps - let me know if there is anything else i can help you with. Rockpocket (talk) 01:35, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Usertalemir2.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Usertalemir2.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 02:07, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Talemir.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Talemir.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:29, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]