User talk:Technofreak90

2000's fads and trends

please dont revert without explaining, especially when what you reverted was cited. there were earlier problems on that same page about reverting and citing. For example, reverting blackberry when it was cited.--Technofreak90 20:06, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Some of the anti-vandal tools don't provide a way to give an edit summary. See my note on the talk page. As a sidenote, I'm adding the additional tags to get the attention of others who can help out with finding sources and cleaning up some of the wording. I think the article has potential, so I'm hoping we can get it in good shape. Thanks for your work on it! Strom 22:03, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

"Dandy" (band)

Unfortunatly, although "Dandy" may be notable according to Sirius, it is not notable according to the standards laid out in WP:MUSIC. If you have any questions, put them on my talk page. Have a nice day. Dropal 01:57, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunatly, unless they have already recorded 2 studio albums with a major label, the guidelines don't consider them notable or something like that, just read the guidelines listed above. They'll tell you everything. Dropal 02:06, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Dandy (band), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article 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 Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, 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. —Pilotguy (ptt) 04:10, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

American culture before and after 9/11

Hi, I saw your question on the Reference Desk from a few days ago. Your question was really interesting, but I don't think people answered what you asked about fads in music and fashion, so I wanted to add my two cents. I'm 22, and I don't think there was a huge shift in popular culture after 9/11. Of course, everyone is constantly saying that the political landscape changed significantly, but pop culture is a different matter.

In fashion and music, there are revivals of old styles every few years, as each generation attempts to reinterpret the past in new ways. The 1990s saw revivals of swing music and ska, for example. Members of the 1950s counterculture, the "beats", wore retro clothing from the 1920s. There was a big garage rock revival around 2001-2003, but the hype about The Strokes definitely began before September 11. So the most recent retro fads aren't necessarily a reaction to 9/11. If you've been reading articles claiming that there is a connection between retro fashion and 9/11, just keep in mind that retro revivals are a very common thing and have been going on for most of the last century.

Personally, although this is off-topic, I think the biggest influence in changing popular culture over the past 5 or 6 years has been the growth of the Internet. There was nothing like YouTube or MySpace when I was your age (wow, now I sound old). Websites like those enable rapid trading of ideas, and new fads seem to emerge every couple of weeks. Also: it's hard to imagine that, ten years ago, if you wanted to look up a simple fact like "when did Elvis die", you would have had to visit a library rather than idly checking Wikipedia. I know the Internet has changed my life in major ways.

I hope my comments shed some light on your interests. Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia! --Grace 19:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

GodTube

The article GodTube has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article seemed to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for 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. NawlinWiki 00:46, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:LSE TOWER.png

Thanks for uploading Image:LSE TOWER.png. Wikipedia gets thousands 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:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

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. 00:07, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Reform to the 2000s fads and trends page

Hi. Me and you edit the 2000s fads and trends in North America article very heavily–I was mostly editing 2006 back then. But since then I've been trying to think of ways to keep the articles clean and well kept, well cited, and look more encyclopedic. In doing so I was the one that moved our page from 2000s fads and trends to the current North American page because people didn't think it shared a worldwide view. So, since you edit it heavily I was wondering if you would support another new idea for a reconstruction idea for the article. Spliting it again into 3 parts --- American Pop Culture (2000 - 2003), American Pop Culture (2004 - 2006), and American Pop Culture (2007 - 2009). That way it would encompass not only fads and trends but other significant popular events in the short 3-4 year time spans. I think this should officially become the standard for these pop culture pages. I will be working on the early 2000s (2000 - 2003) first. (Tigerghost 10:22, 15 July 2007 (UTC))

• • You can find some of my progress at User:Tigerghost/American Pop Culture (2000 - 2003). (Tigerghost 13:51, 15 July 2007 (UTC))

White Flag

I'm sorry but i am giving up on the 2000s fads and trends in NA page. too many times is it being nominated for deletion. It seems as if a collection of 2000s pop culture will disapear. As for now ill edit the pages such as 2000s in video gaming, in film, and so on and so on. i just can't keep fighting off these page deleters. lol. (Tigerghost 19:50, 28 August 2007 (UTC))

I have the list

I copied the article before it was deleted so I have all of the article in microsoft word. but if u want it ill put it on my disscusion page, then when you get it message me ok. Unfortunately, I couldn't save all of the sources because of copy/paste issues. (Tigerghost 02:34, 7 September 2007 (UTC))

March 2008

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Gross realm, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Your first article. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Gwernol 17:20, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Wilson the Volleyball

You've made contributions to Wilson the Volleyball. The article is now being considered for deletion. I am currently involved in giving the article a major overhaul to directly address Wilson's notability. And since you contributed information about Family Guy, I ask that you might provide me with your source for that information so I might add it to the article itself. Thank you, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 05:29, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Electropop

Sorry about putting unneeded citation warning on for Katy Perry Edkollin (talk) 00:10, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

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) 13:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Oakley THUMP

The article Oakley THUMP has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Flash-in-the-pan gadget that doesn't seem to have been that notable even when it came out more than a decade ago. Article basically stagnant since 2007. No inline citations, and both external links are dead.

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. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 02:52, 18 February 2016 (UTC)