User talk:FlightTime/Archive 18

The following page is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

---

Hi - Can you restore my ACC interface access? It expired for inactivity a long time ago but I'm back doing UTRS appeals and I have a couple who are caught in rangeblocks that need usernames created. Thanks for any help you can give me. :-) Katie^talk 17:11, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@KrakatoaKatie: I would love to but, there's a new privacy policy that you need to sign and then have someone at meta add you to the Access to nonpublic information policy Noticeboard. After you have updated this please ping me here and I will reactivate you access. Cheers, Mlpearc (open channel) 17:21, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Done

@KrakatoaKatie: I have seen you signed the Confidentiality agreement, I have restored your access to the ACC interface. If you have any problems please let me know. Mlpearc (open channel) 00:31, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, crap. I'm listed on the ACC users list again, and I can see my woeful statistics, but when I try to log in it says 'Auth failure - User account is not identified'. It's not a password issue - tried that and I get 'could not find user with that username and email address!' (The bang adds that extra panache, you know.) So I'm still locked out. Katie^talk 01:41, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@KrakatoaKatie: Damn, I forgot there's a switch the needs flipping in the interface database, I will contact a dev to get that done. I will ping you here when it's done. Sorry for the delay. Mlpearc (open channel) 01:48, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, no problem! I thought it was me. I always think it's me. Because it usually is me. Thanks so much. Katie^talk 02:05, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No problem I'm off developer hunting :) Mlpearc (open channel) 02:10, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@KrakatoaKatie: You're good to go, at least I was told you are, also please subscribe to the ACC mailing list, You should also join us on IRC #wikipedia-en-accounts ^connect. Lastly, please refresh yourself with the guide as much has changed. Mlpearc (open channel) 03:48, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

When subscribing please follow the instructions on subscribing on the mailing list page. We require a mailed in request form, filled out, signed, and notarized in triplicate with a number 7 pencil. J/K. Though we are very strict on mailing list access requirements, so please do follow the instructions to the letter, and if you're username is different onwiki than it is on ACC, mention it while requesting. Also welcome back to ACC.—^cyberpower_Chat:Offline 04:53, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Got in this time! Thanks, guys! :-) Katie^talk 16:41, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't delete June's name on the basis of the photo file I linked to: my action was based on Ruth Pointer's new autobiography Still So Excited!: my life as a Pointer Sister in which she states that June's husband/manager Bill Whitmore was displeased about not being allowed into the "live room" where "We Are the World" was being recorded and he forbade June to participate. I cited the photograph as corroboration and linked to that specific image file as it was the one on Wikimedia, and altho I feel I can in fact verify June's absence from that specific file I had also looked at a larger image file which can be viewed here - http://images2.fanpop.com/images/photos/7600000/We-Are-The-World-michael-jackson-7644288-1592-1072.jpg - : Anita is plainly visible to the right of Bob Dylan: Ruth is behind her to the right and June is nowhere to be seen. The other non-white women in the photograph are (left-to-right) Tina Turner, Dionne Warwick, Diana Ross, Sheila E, and LaToya Jackson. Of course June's absence from the group photo doesn't mean she didn't sing on the session: again - the basis of my action was Ruth Pointer's account in her autobiography which I think should be considered credible. If an editor wants to take the stance that Ruth's assertion should be part of the article rather than for June's name to simply disappear I can see the validity of that, and I'm prepared to edit the article in said manner myself. Anyway - for the time being my hands are off the article as I await your response. --Cherrylimerickey (talk) 01:46, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As I've stated on The We Are the World Talk page I'm puzzled that the my clarification on my attempting to delete June Pointer's name from the "We Are the World" chorus listing has been archived without any evident response. As I've stated the photo, whether substantial evidence or not, was simply cited as corroboration: my attempted deletion of June Pointer's name as a chorus member for "We Are the World" was based on this passage from Ruth Pointer's autobiography Still So Excited!: my life as a Pointer Sister -

As for Bill Whitmore, June's husband/manager, he embarrassed us by causing a scene because, as a nonsinger, he wasn't allowed inside the studio to begin with. Others such as Jane Fonda, Ali MacGaw, and Dick Clark all patiently watched on a TV monitor in another room. But that wasn't good enough for Bill. His response was that if he didn't go in neither did June. Nobody else was allowed to bring family or handlers inside, and damned if Anita or I were going to argue that an exception be made for Wild Bill. So away he marched with June

I'm still keeping my hands off the article but as I've said if it's not deemed acceptable to simply drop June's name without explanation I plan to either quote Ruth's account or paraphrase it in the article. I'd appreciate any objections to this being brought up before the fact. --Cherrylimerickey (talk) 22:10, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Cherrylimerickey: I have no interest in discussing this. Happy editing, Mlpearc (open channel) 22:21, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

	Brianhe RfA Appreciation award
	Thank you for participating at my RfA. Your support was very much appreciated even if I did get a bit scorched. Brianhe (talk) 02:49, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I found the perfect source for this, but for some reason the website was on the blacklist! Is there anyway to resolve this as the website seems perfectly fine :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kavakdere (talk • contribs) 18:54, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kavakdere: if it's on the blacklist then it can not be used as it is not a good source. Mlpearc (open channel) 18:59, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Forgive my ignorance. I enjoy wikipedia but have never tried editing anything. I tried to add Frank Gorshin's appearance with the Best of Burlesque in 1991. I worked in that show with him, but I might be the sole reference to that fact. How do I list myself as a source??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.201.182.12 (talk) 23:49, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) The best way would probably be to link to a reputable, reliable publication and/or source that cites you. SQL^{Query me!} 23:52, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is a good place to start, a ton of information. Cheers, Mlpearc (open channel) 00:02, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pls see Wikipedia:Help desk#Welcoming committee directing people to wrong page(s)? --Moxy (talk) 21:26, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Moxy: I did, that's how I found the request. Mlpearc (open channel) 21:32, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry should have been more clear....wondering how are people ending up at these pages to begin with...not like this before. Something has changed. -- Moxy (talk) 21:34, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I checked carefully the guidance on "notability" as regards bands and musicians, and Motion Device meet the criteria in a number of ways. They have been featured on National Television on CTV's Canada AM on Tuesday, August 21st 2012. This in in addition to regional and local coverage. They have had a number of articles published about them (not just gig dates or adverts), in Guitar World (05/2014), the Toronto Sun (02/2015), Chicago Live Music Examiner (02/2015), Revolver (08/2014) and by a large number of internet only sites and radio station pages. In addition to the criteria published by wikipedia themselves, they have also been hailed and are being followed by some very big names in the world of rock music - to name a few, Zak Wylde, Alice Cooper, Nikki Sixx, Dee Snider, Steve Vai, Jim Cherry, Jason Bonham, Marty Friedman, and I could go on for a couple more lines. These are just ones who've made public statements - others have been and are following them quite closely, but have not made any public statements, so I have not used their names. I don't think that kind of attention can be completely dismissed, even if it is not easily quantifiable. There is also the not unreasonable point that despite the current listing on "major labels", by far the largest publishers of music, worldwide, and however you measure it, are all online, none of which have been mentioned in that listing at all. Wikipedia is the last place I would expect to see corporate influence, but in this particular field, it seems to be either rather badly compromised, or somewhat obsolete.

All this is verifiable fact, not just my opinion.

I'm not all that familiar with the various methods Wikipedia uses to arrange cooperation between various editors, and certainly not experienced enough to set up a page for the band themselves (or I'd have done so), so I hope I've figured out the best way to contact you about this. I'm sure you will agree that by Wikipedia's own criteria, they do at least meet the threshold for being notable enough to have cover versions noted on those songs. The links to sources of the magazine articles and radio & television coverage would be more properly placed in an entry for the band themselves, not in the notes for a single song they have covered, I'm sure you'll agree. Until they have one, however, where would these sources be cited? I've given stations, titles, and dates, which is surely as much as can reasonably be expected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PhilLee2802 (talk • contribs) 05:10, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@PhilLee2802: Well enough but, if bands are notable they usually have their own page already. I've started a discussion here we will have to wait and see which way the consensus goes. Good luck, Mlpearc (open channel) 15:52, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I don't believe my edit on 'Independent Music' was vandalism. I was adding a citation to a page that said it needed a citation. What was considered vandalism about that? I can provide my source and everything if you need it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whatidoforcollegecredit (talk • contribs) 23:34, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

At first I didn't understand why you had reverted my edit, but I sourced it; hopefully enough - I don't edit often on Wikipedia. --Tono555 (talk) 01:27, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I saw what you did, but how would I do that? Could you help me? --Tono555 (talk) 01:34, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Tono555: You can request an edit {{edit semi-protected}} on the article's talk page. Mlpearc (open channel) 01:58, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Please do not delete this image: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HeadShy_Band.png All the proper forms were filled out and we received confirmation that this has been taken care of. Thank you. Thank you Medicina Records Permissions - Wikimedia Commons 8:06 AM (12 hours ago) to manager Dear Medicina Records, I have made the necessary modifications to the file page: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HeadShy_Band.png Thank you for your contribution to Wikimedia Commons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackballwiki (talk • contribs) 02:21, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Jackballwiki: The file is not marked for deletion, the article is. Mlpearc (open channel) 02:25, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See the posts at the bottom of my talk page, editor evidently was editing logged out as well. Doug Weller talk 16:14, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Both IPs are editing from Columbia University.[1] [2]. Doug Weller talk 16:16, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And the account had been blocked after the ANI discussion. Doug Weller talk 16:33, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Saw that, :P Mlpearc (open channel) 16:35, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing my copy-paste archive template. I've never mastered that feature, but if the IPs are gonna start trolling it would seem to make sense to purge the really stale threads to archive land. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 17:45, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

NP Mlpearc (open channel) 17:47, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There are numerous sources which make it clear that Bowie was a prominent force in the funk rock movement in the mid-1970s. The biggest funk rock track, Fame, was of course a track by David Bowie. Please refrain from changing the inclusion of funk rock from David Bowie's page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SomewhereInLondon (talk • contribs) 19:26, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@SomewhereInLondon: Fantastic, now start a discussion on the talk page and gain consensus for your change. Mlpearc (open channel) 19:30, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

A new speedy deletion notice was sent even though the page was already deleted. There was never a copyright infringement or admitted copyright infringement. We own the copyright on everything. The copyright was always free and clear but the upload was incorrect. Can you please tell us how to have our article reinstated. It was up for many years with no issue. We are happy to provide any and all information needed. There is only one image on the current article that was never an copyright infringement but admittedly the upload and license assignment was handled incorrectly. If you are unable to reinstate our article can you please provide the article and tell us what to do so that this issue never occurs again. Thank you so much for your help. --Jackballwiki (talk) 19:57, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Jackballwiki: The picture was never in question, it has been cleared by your release. The article was deleted because it contained text copied/pasted from the internet, which is not allowed. Mlpearc (open channel) 20:01, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Jackballwiki: That notice is for the category you created, which is now empty. Mlpearc (open channel) 20:04, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Jackballwiki: I can not un-delete the page because I'm not an Admin, even if you have the page restored, you can not edit it due to your COI. Mlpearc (open channel) 20:35, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Again I cannot apologize enough if anything was done incorrectly. The HeadShy Wikipedia page had been up for three years and did meet the notability criteria. All citations were met. I was never notified that there was a notability issue. I certainly hope there is some way I can fix this. Please let me know if you can help. Thank you.--Jackballwiki (talk) 22:15, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Jackballwiki: You need to talk to @RHaworth: to see if they're willing to restore the page and that you will use edit requests to have changes made to the page as you have a large COI, here are some things you should read up on "How to handle conflicts of interest". This is all I can do. Mlpearc (open channel) 22:55, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Mlpearc Thank you so much for your help. I am assuming posting on this page is the correct way to contact @RHaworth. Please let me know if I am missing anything. --Jackballwiki (talk) 23:00, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Jackballwiki: No, you need to post on their talk page. Mlpearc (open channel) 23:06, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for your message. Now that I know about this "society" thing, I hope I become eligible at some point too.Curious georgianna (talk) 05:39, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanx for the reply, I had forgotten about it :P Mlpearc (open channel) 05:42, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[3]

I see revert, revert, revert, revert. Had I spotted this yesterday evening, there would have been a block. I will remind you that "my edits were better" is never an acceptable excuse for edit warring and you may consider yourself lucky to be let off. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:13, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Ritchie333: Excuse me ? where did I say "My edits were better" ? Mlpearc (open channel) 18:30, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Don't filibuster me - I used that as a stereotypical example of a typical unblock request you might have given had you been blocked. I'm not going to patronise you - you know what 3RR is, and that if you do 4 reverts within 24 hours with no talk page discussion, you can get blocked for it. Please be more careful next time. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:35, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A clairvoyant Admin, great. Over and out. Mlpearc (open channel) 18:39, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I added information to the page https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Band&oldid=705327784 with a proper source and you removed it? Whats wrong with it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thebeach95 (talk • contribs) 21:53, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Thebeach95: There is no source in any of these edits, [4], [5]. Please see Help:Referencing for beginners Mlpearc (open channel) 21:59, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Seems really,really upset at me for pointing out that Wikipedia generally uses the "stage name" as the first words in articles about people. Especially when the children use the same name. And he is an eensy bit snarky about it as well. Cheers. Collect (talk) 13:57, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: pointing out our Manual of Style, which is a policy - not a suggestion (your words, by the way) - is hardly "snarky". EauZenCashHaveIt (I'm All Ears) 03:52, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Collect: I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about but, cheers to you as well, Mlpearc (open channel) 15:29, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nvrmnd, I think I found what you're referring to, and I have commented. Mlpearc (open channel) 15:49, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mlpearc. I just wanted to bring this overly lengthy discussion to your attention. Several editors practically begged Collect to put an end to the battle, continuously, and utterly unsuccessfully. This is what will most probably happen on the Gibson page unless an abrupt intervention happens. I am also unsure whether I was followed to the Gibson page because of that discussion. Your advice will be most appreciated. EauZenCashHaveIt (I'm All Ears) 03:49, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Mlpearc:! I have a question about the Millennials article reverted edit regarding the Digital Technology section. I noticed, that some of the specific details I added were removed. I was curious as to why. Thanks!

@Puthenv2: I see two reasons for the revert 1). You placed an external link in the body of the article, which is not done. 2). You did not provide a reliable source to support your claim. Mlpearc (open channel) 23:28, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Mlpearc:, mea culpa! Thanks for the correction and the feedback. I appreciate it!

Hello, In the last week I have very quickly gotten up to speed on the 'dos and donts' around here, but I'm still learning. I have been putting a lot of effort into the quality of source material, and with the stuff I'm working on (in the main), that's not easy at all. Motörhead is something I've watched for some time, to have this genre issue sorted. IMO it is really simple, any fan of the band knows full well that Lemmy stated more times than can be counted that HE plays Rock n Roll, so what ever anyone else has an opinion on the genre of the band, to be blunt IMO, is completely irrelevant. I realise we have to have a consensus, and I have put that in the talk page as per the norms to do so, and as a compromise to the subject, I added all the 'opinioned' genres to the info box, because the one that is in question wasn't even there. I don't think that I'm 'taking over and controlling' anything or even trying, to also be blunt. I've come on the Wiki to 'sort out' exactly these types of things, that have bugged me for years when reading the sites article's on many bands pages and albums, and now I have the time to contribute. The 'persons' that started to change my efforts, for what ever reasons, didn't start the process of in a respectful manor and I reciprocated the lack of proper niceties right back at them. I've become much more cordial since and am doing my utmost best to play by the rules we all have to follow. I have a massive music collection and am a musician myself for 25 years so I also have a bone on contention with what some people have called the genre of many bands on here, just to be honest. It doesn't change the fact that I have to use formal process's to have this debated and I'm fine with that, what I don't like is people being quick to judge me. Nuro Dragonfly (talk) 23:24, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Blatant disregard for protocols on manors and arrogance unwarranted. Thank you. Blackmane (talk) 01:19, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Mlpearc (open channel) 01:21, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I don't see anywhere in the discussion where you display a disregard for our policies and protocols related to large country houses and estates... only (talk) 01:52, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Only: Thanx but, "large country houses and estates" ? not sure where that came from. Maybe I'm missing the pun :P Mlpearc (open channel) 02:11, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

wikt:manor. only (talk) 02:14, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Manner(s) vs. Manor(s), this might Australian spelling, but I somehow doubt it. Karst (talk) 07:51, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you that some people want to list every instrument an artist ever breathed on in the infobox and that this should be stopped. However, if you look at his career, Neil Young played a lot of keyboards. He played piano on a couple of songs on just about every album he ever did. With CSNY, he played a fair amount of organ, at least in concert. In his live solo performances, he always played piano or pump organ as well as guitar. Now, the banjo is an instrument that he occasionally fooled around with. Let's leave that off. But I really think that including keyboard is quite appropriate. Bob Caldwell CSL (talk) 20:14, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Bob Caldwell CSL: You don't have to convince me, you need to start a discussion on the article's talk page and gain consensus. Mlpearc (open channel) 20:20, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MlPearc,

I appreciate your response; however, I think there is some confusion. I have not made any edits to Patricia's page. I was within the edit tool in order to see how to upload a new picture, in which I found out that you need a confirmed account to do any uploading of files (pictures). We are not interested in writing an article or editing anything that is currently on Patricia's Wikipedia page. All I need is someone to upload a new image of her. Whether that be me or someone else.

Is this not possible?

Thanks!

Amanda

@Mathiam04: As stated at your permissions request "If the file you want to upload is available under a free license, it should be uploaded to our free media repository, the Commons. You do not need any special permissions to upload there, and you can use the same username and password you use here. If it is not available under a free license, it should be requested using the Files for Upload process" The messages and links I left on your talk page are for you to use and help with your conflict of interest if needed. Cheers, Mlpearc (open channel) 19:27, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — xaosflux ^Talk 21:35, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanx. Mlpearc (open channel) 21:38, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've had the missus (academic historian) run me through how to cite a book reference, and have done so to all the things I've done, which I was going to do, but I got distracted by multiple tasks at once. I don't know how to group the same ref though yet...and yes I should have had it ready to go before hitting save, I know...Nuro msg me 04:21, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

and yes they are all on page three of the 70+ page books that have come with the sets. Nuro msg me 04:22, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Nuro Dragonfly: Very good See: Help:Referencing_for_beginners#Same_reference_used_more_than_once. Mlpearc (open channel) 04:27, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK I think I've got the hang of that now and am going through to fix them. Nuro msg me 05:15, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Only if reliable sources specifically state "some of which have been ranked among the Beatles' finest."." specifically? so you can only write things if they are specifically plagiarized from a reliable source?? encyclopedia's include room for summarizing/paraphrasing sources, otherwise they'd be unreadable strings of quotation after quotation, no?...in a summarizing intro you can't make the obvious inference that being ranked in a top ten means ranked among the finest or best?? nonsense.. the first sentence of the piece says he" achieved international fame." well, of course...it's obvious..but there's no source that specifically states, "George Harrison achieved international fame." 68.48.241.158 (talk) 17:29, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@68.48.241.158: In this particular case yes, otherwise it's just personal opinion. Mlpearc (open channel) 17:36, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

it's my opinion that rs ranked two of his songs among the Beatles' best (top ten)? no, that would be a fact....my opinion would be whether I agreed or not..which I probably don't lol...but that's okay..68.48.241.158 (talk) 17:51, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Mlpearc. I'm leaving you a message because I like you, you're awesome, and I don't want to see you get sucked into any repercussions that you don't deserve. Be very careful when leaving messages like these on talk pages. I know he's an obvious sock, but messages like this can put you at risk for having them backfire at you by the community. This can be seen as antagonizing, which is discouraged behavior. I just don't want it to backfire on you later if somebody were to find it. Anyways, I just wanted to give you a courtesy and let you know. You're awesome man, and keep fighting the good fight! I'll see you out there; until next time... have a good one :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:28, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Oshwah: I know, :P but it felt sooooo good (Thanx for caring) Mlpearc (open channel) 00:31, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

HAHAHAHA!!! I bet it did :-). You're welcome; I'm just watching out for good people. I'm glad you understand and appreciate what I was doing :-). Anyways, cheers my friend! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:33, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I added post-hardcore to the genre list of the Black Flag (band) article because post-hardcore has citations (See the Black Flag (band) article's Style and legacy section. Just letting you know why I added post-hardcore to the Black Flag (band) article's genre list. EuropeanSwedenAmerican2222 (talk) 01:57, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@EuropeanSwedenAmerican2222: Ok, if you would use edit summaries we wouldn't be here. Mlpearc (open channel) 02:03, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you and ParkHDavis created the entry almost at the same time, causing a duplicate. Park removed it, and I just removed it again to only have the one section on the page. RickinBaltimore (talk) 18:48, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@RickinBaltimore: Oops, :P thanx no problem. Mlpearc (open channel) 18:49, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my comment. American In Brazil (talk) 01:53, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@American In Brazil: I promise I will, as soon as you point me to it, the section header is not telling me much, a link would work :P Mlpearc (open channel) 02:04, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nvrmnd I got it :) Mlpearc (open channel) 02:15, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re [6], technically the IP is correct. The Silmarillion indicates that Dwarves fought in the Alliance; see Durin, sub Durin IV. -- Elphion (talk) 15:53, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I stand corrected, Thank you, Mlpearc (open channel) 06:40, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted good faith edits by Sherick (talk): Sorry, neither one of those references are reliable

Understood, but where is the source on the B♭6? I look and see nowhere that it is even claimed to be a sixth octave note (which it isn't of course, but that doesn't matter). Sherick (talk) 20:50, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is regarding the USA releases of the Scorpions albums. I am a collector of vinyl records and I have several vinyl albums of the German heavy metal band Scorpions. The copies that I have are mostly USA pressings with one pressing from Canada. They are all on the Mercury label. This is how I know on which USA label that their records, tapes and CD's were released on. I just undid your reversion of my edit and added this particular source, which is a discography off all the Scorpions releases. They even have separate pages for their individual albums and shows the labels that they were released on in other countries. Here it is and it is a very good and very recognized source:

https://www.discogs.com/artist/63552-Scorpions

Let me know what you think. You can leave your answer on my talk page. Thanks in advance.Frschoonover (talk) 23:35, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Frschoonover: I have a lot of albums also, the darn thing is "readers can not check" my (or yours) collection for verification, hence I asked for you to provide a cite for your claim, not for me but, our readers, that is why we are building this project. Cheers, Mlpearc (open channel) 23:44, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Mlpearc: I can understand why as in the past, many have made edits here on Wikipedia, mostly anonymous editors and even some registered users who only want to make trouble by adding things that were very inaccurate or to simply vandalize as was the case for a long time with the Atlantic Records article in the wake of "Weird Al"'s video for White and Nerdy. Currently as of this date, the Atlantic Records article is back under "semi-protected" status due to continued vandalism by those who refuse to grow up. By the way, regarding the source, it is, IMHO, a very good source that not only shows artists, their artists and the labels their music and other materials were released on, but also ways that anyone can obtain any record that they are looking for as they have sellers on the site selling whatthey have. I have finished my collections of particular artists thanks to Discogs. I think and feel that it's much better than Ebay. By the way, I'd like to know what your feelings are about the source as I am asking simply out of curiosity. Thanks again in advance and happy collecting.Frschoonover (talk) 00:09, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious. What was wrong with the link the way it was? Both the previous link and yours work. Why is yours better?--Bbb23 (talk) 18:41, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: It's a direct target. The link was already piped, so whats wrong with not sending the target through a redirect ? The template is highly used and the links in the template will not be changed often so a direct target seems preferable IMO. Mlpearc (open channel) 18:58, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Surprisingly, that even occurred to me, who when he sees piped thinks of plumbing. I don't like underscores, though in wikilinks. I know they work, but for some reason they bother me.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:11, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I usually remove underscores when grabbing a target in a URL, I also think they are unsightly if in the display part of the link. Updating links like these is a pet peeve of mine. Mlpearc (open channel) 20:21, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted good faith edits by Sherick (talk): Sorry, neither one of those references are reliable

Understood, but where is the source on the B♭6? I look and see nowhere that it is even claimed to be a sixth octave note (which it isn't of course, but that doesn't matter). Sherick (talk) 20:50, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Sorry to bring this back up, but aside from that you never responded to my concern, I also wanted to follow up on the unreliable references. This site http://www.vintagevinylnews.com/2014/05/digging-deeper-axl-rose-is-not-singer.html has been used a verified source for the subject of singers' ranges and specific notes. This site itself cites The Range Place as its own source for these things. These same listings were used by ConcertHotels.com which garnered national mainstream news coverage, implicitly validating the reliability of The Range Place as a source.Sherick (talk) 22:38, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

Working on behalf of the Dos Equis brand and attempting to add edits. Any suggestions on how best to add a section about his most recent mission to Mars and update his photo?

Many Thanks in advance.

TMIMITW-owner (talk) 21:22, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@TMIMITW-owner: First of all, you shouldn't be editing that article at all, due to your conflict of interest. You need to make edit requests on the talk page. Mlpearc (open channel) 21:33, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I actually missed the fact that the second photo isn't Sherman, it's vandalism. I wonder what other vandalism is lurking in that article. Seems like it should be page protected. Kendall-K1 (talk) 17:24, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kendall-K1: I had already requested page protection. Mlpearc (open channel) 17:33, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I can understand your confusion. Yes, it is true that drums are considered percussion. However, percussion in this context often refers to auxiliary percussion. Usually to distinguish the two, drums and percussion are listed as two different instruments. As for instruments, he is known for is large gong behind him, his red talking drum, two rows of wind chimes, cowbell, electronic percussion, octobans, finger cymbals, that weird spirally metallic instrument dangling in front of the wind chimes, plus many other percussion instruments in the studio. Dobbyelf62 (talk) 02:29, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dobbyelf62: Then why not remove drums and let percussion cover the lot? Mlpearc (open channel) 03:38, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that should be fine. Dobbyelf62 (talk) 01:49, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dobbyelf62: But I've never seen a drummers page just list percussion. Mlpearc (open channel) 01:50, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I know Mickey Hart's page just listed percussion up until recently. Dobbyelf62 (talk) 01:53, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MLpearc - Thank you for your feedback on my Michael J Fox posting. Am trying to figure out if I can still add IMDB and Canada's Walk of Fame website as my source for information. And, I know that you're a Wiki expert so would appreciate you helping out a rookie. Thanks, molly243Molly243 (talk) 20:12, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Molly243: Thanx, but no, I'm nowhere near an expert. IMDB is not considered a reliable source, I think this will help Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. Cheers, Mlpearc (open channel) 20:28, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You reverted an edit I made to the Revolver Ocelot-article. I would like to explain why I made that edit. I changed "Venom Snake" to Venom Snake because Venom Snake, at the time of this writing, has his own article.

According to this diff you removed part of a link without explaining why or why it was wrong in the first place. Please use edit summaries to explain what and why you are doing, this will lessen the confusion for all involved. Mlpearc (open channel) 21:43, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is the lack of an edit summary really grounds to undo an otherwise perfectly reasonable edit, and then caution the editor on their talk page? I have to ask - did you even review the edit, or just undo a reduction in bytes with no summary? fredgandt 21:51, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Fred Gandt: No, breaking an otherwise perfect link is, Mlpearc (open channel) 21:55, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

But Venom Snake has his own article. Why have the Revolver Ocelot article link to List of characters in the Metal Gear series#Venom Snake when it could link directly to Venom Snake's article?

Exactly, this is why it's important to use edit summaries, to let other editors know what you are doing. This link is fine to a passing editor not everyone is going to know that something has changed. Cheers, Mlpearc (open channel) 22:04, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So, if I changed the link back and added an edit summary like "I changed "Venom Snake" to "Venom Snake" because Venom Snake has his own article called "Venom Snake"", would that be okay then?

On your first edit this would of been fine, no need to do it now. Happy editing, Mlpearc (open channel) 22:12, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I changed "Venom Snake" to "Venom Snake" in the article in question, and to make sure the edit won't be misunderstood, I added the edit summary I mentioned earlier to make sure the edit won't be misunderstood. Is that okay?

Fantastic Mlpearc (open channel) 22:22, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm just curious why you did this and a whole bunch of similar edits with the same edit summery. Those shortcuts lead to the same pages as the longer wikilinks you replaced them with. I've seen your prolific edits and respect your work — I'm just curious. Thanks! - tucoxn\^talk 00:55, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Tucoxn: Shortcuts are good when creating new content, kinda like a secretary does with shorthand when taking dictation, then when there's more time they re-write it using normal words. On pages that don't change often like project page headers, templates the "shorthand" can be replaced with regular links providing you keep in mind not to violate WP:NOTBROKEN if the link is already piped using a shortcut there's no harm defining the target to the final destination page. I strongly suggest that, unless you understand when it OK or not this is not to be done. Mlpearc (open channel) 03:10, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain why you reverted both edits? One is to restore the link to the band's original website, the other was prepping the article to run reFill to expand the URLs. —Farix (t | c) 21:08, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize about the revert but, it was only one which I made before I realized what you were doing, which is why I use edit summaries. Cheers, Mlpearc (open channel) 21:21, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, it was two edits you reverted, the first edit was this one. —Farix (t | c) 21:31, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@TheFarix: Sorry, but my name is nowhere within that diff. Mlpearc (open channel) 21:34, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Check here it might be clearer [7] only one revert. Mlpearc (open channel) 21:36, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, you reverted two edits at the same time. You reverted both this edit AND this edit. If you look a the diff of your revert, you can see that the both changes were reverted. —Farix (t | c) 21:41, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

LOL, OK whatever. Happy editing, Mlpearc (open channel) 21:44, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the change I made to the Joe Walsh page, all I did was add a show he appeared on to his "List of acting performances in film and television" list. He appeared playing himself in a poker game in the show "Criminal Minds" within the last two weeks (I don't remember the exact date but can look it up if it's really necessary). None of the other entries in his "List of acting performances in film and television" list have any sort of citations to sources, reliable or otherwise, so I didn't think I needed to provide one for this addition. I think the change should be restored. Thanks... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.14.131.22 (talk) 16:23, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You need to reference your claim, also edit summaries do wonders, explaining why you're making the change helps editors watching pages, how am I supposed to determine if the addition you made is not just someone adding a joke or someone adding text that they consider correct. I'm not saying your information is not correct, I'm saying please leave something as to why your making a change. Happy editing, Mlpearc (open channel) 16:32, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Telecaster of Paul Weller is often mistakenly thought to be from 1958, but it is in fact a 1965 Maple Cap Fender Telecaster that has had the paint removed and refinished with lacquer. Here is the comparison photos of his guitar and another example of a '65 Tele. They have the same string tree position and transitional 1965 Fender Telecaster logo. Also attached is a photo of Weller's Telecaster taken backstage in Japan before it's refinish and after, again the original colour matches the '65 Maple Cap Tele. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.212.183.125 (talk) 18:17, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need to explain here, you need to explain and source your claims with your changes to the article. Mlpearc (open channel) 18:23, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Mlpearc, just a small note. I'm not sure what happened here, but under the personal life section, you broke the "United States dollar" link while tidying up other links. Thought I'd just drop a note in case it influences your future link cleaning routine. I've gone ahead and made the small fix. Best, Airplaneman ✈ 19:55, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Airplaneman: Thanx for pointing that out, I was using a script, I'll keep an eye out for that in the future. Cheers, Mlpearc (open channel) 20:04, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Although Motörhead is often considered a heavy metal band, Lemmy always described Motörhead's music as simply "rock and roll". In 2011, he said: "We were not heavy metal. We were a rock 'n' roll band. Still are. Everyone always describes us as heavy metal even when I tell them otherwise. Why won't people listen?"[106] In 2014, he reiterated to Der Spiegel that he did not particularly like heavy metal.[107]

From Motorhead page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.164.104.128 (talk) 21:19, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) IP 89.164.104.128, your recent edits at Phil Taylor (musician) are unexplained and unnecessary and border on vandalism. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:40, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

But Sue is the leader of The Bangles. I know She's founder with Vicki & Debbi but the leader is Sue. You should write like that. --Vicenarcotics (talk) 21:33, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Vicenarcotics: No. There is no musical article that labels any of the founders as "Leaders" it's against the consistency of the musical articles. Mlpearc (open channel) 21:38, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Mlpearc: Oh, ok. You're right but she's the leader and one of founders with Vicki & Debbi of The Bangles.--Vicenarcotics (talk) 21:42, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Vicenarcotics: Very good, happy editing, Mlpearc (open channel) 21:46, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An edit that I made on the "Code Talker" page was wrongfully reverted. The original line, stating that a character in a video game wanted to create a virus to kill everyone who speaks English, is incorrect. The character is, in fact, forced by another character to create a parasite that kills people who speak English.

 Fixed Mlpearc (open channel) 12:30, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey dude I know that vandalism is a serious thing on here, and I would never purposely vandalize any article, but what I did on the James Hetfield article was meant as an April Fools joke. If you want to blame someone, blame the people at Loudwire, they came up with it first. Just wait and watch, some poor sucker is gonna see the Loudwire article and think it's real, come over here and post it, and then you or someone else will come in and see that and say "oh their vandalizing and posting false information" and then they'll get banded from editing because they believed a stupid joke article on a music news website. I highly respect James Hetfield, if anything he is the reason I picked up guitar. Look in just gonna tell you I also made an edit to the April 1st page which was meant as a harmless little prank. I'll take it off tomorrow, unless I forget in which case someone (hopefully) will do it for me. Today is a day of joking around and having fun. Chill out and loosen up. Don't tell me you haven't done something like this on April Fools day cause I know you probably have. God bless, and have a nice day. Hawkeye55555 (talk) 14:48, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Hawkeye55555: You don't call this vandalism ? Tell me where does James work as a "Table" ? Go play somewhere else. Please don't call this an April fools joke, I've reverted you before for the same stupid schoolyard pranks. Mlpearc (open channel) 14:58, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You obviously haven't listened to the Lulu album with Lou Reed have you? In one song James screams "I AM THE TABLE". Apparently the original lyric was "I am the tablet" but it sounds like table. Tablet doesn't make much sense either though so God knows what they were thinking when they wrote it. Hawkeye55555 (talk) 15:05, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OH and by the way, you haven't reverted me for crap. EVERY Metallica fan has done this joke at least once, I'm not the only one. Trust me my friend, you'll see it again, and it won't be from me. Hawkeye55555 (talk) 15:09, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mlpearc,

Didn't want to cause any problems so first off I apologize for that. The change I made on the madness article was about the bands record labels. Being a 2 tone ska and madness fan I know that they released their first single on the 2 tone label but this was not included in their labels list. So merely I was just including this as I assumed it had just got missed off. Again apologies for causing any inconvenience but was just trying to put right what I thought was missed off.

cheers,

You must provide a reliable source to support your claim. Cheers, Mlpearc (open channel) 14:07, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Its kinda a giver to be fair and it even states it in the madness article, however http://2-tone.info/artists/index.html from the official 2 tone label website will give a reliable source. I hope

Please add your reference to your change, not here. Mlpearc (open channel) 17:54, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, did you truly examine the prior version my change was fixing before mass reverting? In addition to the improper comma, the page showed these errors:

Warning: Jim Nabors is calling Template:Cite news with more than one value for the "page" parameter. Only the last value provided will be used.

Warning: Page using Template:Infobox person with unknown parameter "record labels" (this message is shown only in preview).

3. ^ Nabors, Jim. Jim Nabors - Official Website http://www.jimnabors.com/NationalSportsNews/. Retrieved 25 May 2015. Missing or empty |title= (help)

4. ^ Jim, Nabors. Final Singing of Back Home Again by Jim Nabors in in 2014 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wcgaRkHAWY. Missing or empty |title= (help)

209.6.229.194 (talk) 14:58, 2 April 2016 (UTC) "[reply]

@209.6.229.194: Did you explain your changes in a edit summary so other editors will know what your doing ? No you didn't. If you don't want to take the time to explain your edits then you have to deal with some aftermath. Cheers, Mlpearc (open channel) 15:18, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, my summaries (in this case, "template fixes and remove comma") have been adequate in the past; all you said was "No consensus for this type of change" - what type of change? I'm asking for a brief explanation so I can address your issue. 209.6.229.194 (talk) 15:40, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@209.6.229.194: You changed the Infobox from Infobox person to Infobox musical artist this type of change requires discussion and consensus

Hi, I have received your message regarding R Lee Ermey's page and I can provide a reliable source :http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/news/full-metal-jacket-actor-r-lee-ermey-poses-in-facebook-pictures-with-lions-he-shot-9046951.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrAlienGuy101 (talk • contribs) 21:17, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@MrAlienGuy101: The reference needs to be in your edit, see Help:Referencing for beginners. Mlpearc (open channel) 21:24, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote in the description for your revert on Andress' page: "Plots of work do not go on this page. (Using Twinkle)."

First of all, there is no Twinkle here. That description is a copy and paste job from a plotline that appears on several Falcon Crest-related story sites.

Secondly, there are already plots for two films from her early career on that page, Dr. No and Casino Royale, so unless you decidedly remove those from the Career section, there is no reason not to mention her character's storyline on the series. Iistal (talk) 19:47, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Iistal: See, WP:TWINKLE Secondly, I saw your change, I didn't read the article for correctness. Mlpearc (open channel) 19:51, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I have explained my reasons for why a brief description (85 letters) of her character's storyline be included in the sentence. Are you for, against, or neutral? Because, as I said, it is merited. Iistal (talk) 19:56, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter what I think, it's against WP:MOS. Mlpearc (open channel) 19:58, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Where does that page you linked say anything about what this debate is about? I see brief plot descriptions listed on many pages. Iistal (talk) 20:14, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Prince article is getting hosed up. Can you fix it? April, 2016[edit] Okay, whomever is updating the article is going overboard with changing everything to past tense. The following sentence, for example, should have remained in present tense. The music he created still exists.... smh "His music integrated a wide variety of styles, including funk, rock, R&B, soul, hip hop, disco, psychedelia, jazz, and pop." Should read "His music integrates a wide variety of styles, including funk, rock, R&B, soul, hip hop, disco, psychedelia, jazz, and pop." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.160.40 (talk) 21:48, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Thank you. Mlpearc (open channel) 21:54, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well... could just be interesting to know why it's uncomfortable to watch the symbol as it is. With that small sign you can't figure out what it's really look like. --Christian47 (talk) 03:40, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well... if you click on it you can see it real good, and it's not messing up the text. Mlpearc (open channel) 03:45, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I awaited that answer, so I mean, what's the point that you have to click further to look at the symbol? If the symbol is including in text, I presume that is the intention to see it clearly.--Christian47 (talk) 03:53, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Christian47: You're welcome to change it back but, you'll have more reverts by other editors, not me. Mlpearc (open channel) 03:57, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Mlpearc: Hi - I noticed you reverted a fix[[8]] that I made to the Hybrid Theory article. I removed a vandal's name and replaced it with the correct book title. You subsequently reverted your revert back to my version. I'm curious why you did this. I realize we're all human, but this revert seems to be beyond what someone might accidentally do. Are you using a bot perhaps? It wouldn't be that big a deal except for two things: by reverting my edit you weaken my editing history statistics, and I have to take time to see if the vandal has gone back to the article.Timtempleton (talk) 17:51, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Timtempleton: Did you see my next edit about one minute later ? Mlpearc (open channel) 03:32, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Mlpearc:I did - I mentioned that in my note. That's why I was curious what's going on. It was an edit that wasn't needed, and the revert dinged my edit record. You know we're all anal here.Timtempleton (talk) 08:10, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Timtempleton: Calm down, I almost instantly fixed it, It was a miss click, shit happens, cheers. Mlpearc (open channel) 11:55, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Mlpearc: Thanks for clarifying. No need for the foul language. Just trying to understand what happened. Would have put a smiley face on my comments also but didn't think it necessary. Cheers. Timtempleton (talk) 14:30, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My talk page is is not censored, cheers and happy editing. Mlpearc Phone (open channel) 14:39, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you reverting my edits? 72.43.153.30 (talk) 13:52, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@72.43.153.30: I explained in the edit summary [9] Mlpearc Phone (open channel) 14:52, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How is that peacocking? Isn't it just factual? 72.43.153.30 (talk) 15:28, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@72.43.153.30: It seems to me as a fan bloat / peacocking edit. I suggest starting a discussion and see what others think. Cheers, Mlpearc Phone (open channel) 15:48, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. My changes in the Jethro Tull article are all sourced from the liner notes of releases, and also the articles on Wikipedia of those releases. How do I put that information? It needs a source even if it is mentioned in articles already? RealTull (talk) 18:17, 27 May 2016 (UTC) For example Crest of a Knave RealTull (talk) 18:18, 27 May 2016 (UTC) None of the chart seems to be sourced and most of it is incorrect. Doane Perry was not a member in 1987. RealTull (talk) 18:19, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@RealTull: If a reader like me doesn't have the liner notes, how can I be sure the information you're changing is correct ? Please see Help:Referencing for beginners for guidelines for proper referencing. Cheers, Mlpearc Phone (open channel) 18:23, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to be nosy here but I was just in the area and saw your discussion. I'm going to have to disagree with you by citing the same source you sent ReatlTull to: Help:Referencing for beginners#References not online. Isn't this no different than referencing a book or other offline source that most of us don't have?Timtempleton (talk) 18:35, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Timtempleton: Please discuss changes of the article on the article's talk page, Not here. Mlpearc Phone (open channel) 18:39, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is about general referencing guidelines used by individual editors, so I thought this spot was more appropriate. I love Jethro Tull, but not really ready to spend time discussing the liner notes. ;-)Timtempleton (talk) 18:45, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article already has the facts. The chart does not reflect the rest of the article, and it also has no references. RealTull (talk) 19:12, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Example it says "# Gerry Conway – drums, percussion (1982; studio – 1987–1988)" and I only added a bar to show 1987-1988. The text was there already I did not add it. You reverted my change so that the text and chart disagree now. Neither has any references. I do not understand this double standard. RealTull (talk) 19:15, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@RealTull: I am referring to your edit, not the other inconsistency of the article. The best course in these type of situations is to discuss it on the article's talk page. Mlpearc (open channel) 19:17, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Place to discuss is here because I want to know why you think the inconsistent unsourced content is better than the consistent sourced content that is backed up by other articles. I do not understand and if I am going to edit here I need to know why this is the case. RealTull (talk) 00:20, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@RealTull: I have not said your information is incorrect, I said it wasn't sourced or explained adequately I searched the article history as far back as October 2014 and it has been 1976 all the way back, and I don't think you've haven't shown any references as to why 76 is incorrect. These type of discussions belong on the article's talk page, not in user space, that way others can chime in. Cheers, Mlpearc (open channel) 00:37, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What is 1976? RealTull (talk) 04:04, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@RealTull: your edit Mlpearc (open channel) 04:13, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See Too Old to Rock 'n' Roll: Too Young to Die! RealTull (talk) 04:56, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also the list above the chart says clearly "# Dee Palmer – keyboards (1977–1980; also worked with the band as an arranger between 1967 and 1976)". I don't understand why you don't see the chart and list above it do not agree with each other. I tried to fix this. It is immediately above the char yet you say it is not in the article history. It is in the current article even.RealTull (talk) 14:31, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@RealTull: This will be my last comment, You just don't get it, how can the casual reader (and that's why we are here to build an encyclopedia for the reader, we're not here to compete to see who can get what posted to a website) tell your claim is correct, how are they suppose to know "Hey if you want to be sure this is correct, go look at another page then bounce back and continue reading..." that sucks. So Happy editing enjoy your block (if you continue this outlook someone will block you) Cheers, Mlpearc (open channel) 15:52, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you did your research, you would see that John Fogerty did use Music Man guitars. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mesa Boogie Bass 400+ (talk • contribs) 18:01, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Mesa Boogie Bass 400+: Please review WP:BURDEN. Cheers, Mlpearc (open channel) 18:37, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The source is rottentomatoes itself.

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_man_who_knew_infinity/

It's cited at the bottom of the article. You need to click the link though. 80.135.44.198 (talk) 18:46, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I am sorry if I am causing confusion. I am considered to be above average intelligence, but Wikipedia editing is putting me to the test!

I tried to confirm the copyright permission for File:Robert Beck self portrait.jpg, and I can see that it has come back with "‪reconfirming permission for Hot Sardines photos‬" as the title. My ticket number was 2016060710015903 (I had not quoted it because it did not arrive in my email until I had already sent my message), but on your message the reference is 2016060710014146.

I am trying to confirm attribution copyright permission for Robert Beck's self portrait - he has tasked me with his Wikipedia entry and confirmed this copyright. Grateful for any clarification.

Best wishesSueJ 17:59, 7 June 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SueJenkins (talk • contribs)

Hello - I received your message. Our network is the most watched classic TV network on television right now and we air many of the most iconic series ever produced. I noticed that a lot of real estate on the shows' wiki pages either list outdated information, like where it aired years ago, don't list actual tune in times, which take up minimal space, but important to viewers or list some networks but not others. Also, some TV shows have an existing syndication sections, but others don't.

Please advise on how I can move forward to provide updated info about where viewers can watch these shows now. I don't want to upset the apple cart, but also want to give Wiki readers timely and specific info about these shows and where to find them.

Regards, Melissa — Preceding unsigned comment added by MelissaK605 (talk • contribs) 22:54, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That information belongs at metv.com, not Wikipedia. It is against Wikipedia policy, as explained in WP:NOTTVGUIDE, or "Wikipedia is not a directory". If you find an article that is in violation of this policy, please feel free to delete any programming schedules you find. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:03, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) @MelissaK605: If you work for Me-TV you shouldn't be adding anything about your company at all, please see Declaring an interest. If you want to have something added about your company to an article like what you have been, you need to make an edit request. Mlpearc (open channel) 23:07, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing me to your explanation. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" (talk) 19:30, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

{{you've got mail}} -- LuK3 (Talk) 19:15, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@LuK3: I have responded to your email. Mlpearc (open channel) 22:17, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I changed Eagles to the past tense because of a recent interview with Don Henley with Rolling stone stating "this is the end". I have put the link on the talk page well over a week ago, with no one even noticing. So I edited, and placed source links to the interview the the Wiki page. For your ease of convenience, here is the the article. http://www.rollingstone.com/music/lists/eagles-complete-discography-don-henley-looks-back-20160610#

My question is - how is the phrase "This is the end" from the surviving original band member- and the one that now owns the name- in an interview with a highly reputable music magazine, not a definitive that the band is dissolved? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Locnar1975 (talk • contribs) 18:53, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Locnar1975: I have undone my revert, this should spark others to the talk page. Mlpearc (open channel) 18:59, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for correcting me on editing to eliminate redirects. I was under the mistaken impression that redirects are sub-optimal, and should be corrected. Thanks for educating me (and saving me time in the future).

Best regards,

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 21:00, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Septegram: Thank you for understanding. However, there is nothing wrong with updating the link target if it's already piped also navigation templates such as {{Led Zeppelin}} should always have direct links, piped or not. Cheers, Mlpearc (open channel) 23:02, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly how is what i edited bad i changed a heading what i did made it more orderly and made more sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stringskull (talk • contribs) 05:02, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Stringskull: You changed a section header level but, it was correct before you changed it. Mlpearc (open channel) 05:19, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the information I added to Paris Hilton is correct. She is a pornographic actress because she acted in a pornographic video which made her famous. She is not a DJ because she is yet to perform on a DJ set anywhere and also I can provide citations. I request my edits to be reverted and I will provide the citations shall it be reverted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rizhopper (talk • contribs) 14:53, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Rizhopper: You'll need reliable third party sources to back up your claim. The only "movie" I heard of was a private tape leaked to the public, which does not make a actress. Mlpearc Phone (open channel) 15:03, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Mlpearc, sorry, but I do not believe that these reverts were warranted: the user did include a source, so "BLP violation" here needs a better explanation, because I don't see the violation. In addition, the edit warring on that user's talk page was unwise; they were perfectly in their right to blank that talk page. Whatever the problems may have been with the user's other edits and their manners, it's important to keep the high ground. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 01:22, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I believe we had a discussion back in March of this year about an edit I made to the Revolver Ocelot-article (Where I edited it so that an instance where it linked to list of characters in the Metal Gear series#Venom Snake would instead link directly to Venom Snake's article). It is mainly because of this prior discussion that I am contacting you about this. Would you be willing to edit a locked article for me? Specifically, I would like to ask you to edit the article for Metal Gear Solid. You see, back on March 30 of this year, I made an edit request on Metal Gear Solid's talk page, requesting that two instances where the article linked to list of recurring Metal Gear characters#Gray Fox be changed to instead link to Gray Fox's own article, Gray Fox (Metal Gear). Here is what I specifically wrote: "Within the "Characters"-section, the word "Ninja" links to list of recurring Metal Gear characters#Gray Fox. However, given that Gray Fox has his own article (Gray Fox (Metal Gear)), wouldn't it be better if Ninja linked to Gray Fox's own article? Similarly, within the "Plot"-section, it says "The ninja reappears and Snake realizes it is his former ally Gray Fox, believed dead". There, Gray Fox links to list of recurring Metal Gear characters#Gray Fox rather than Gray Fox's own article. Wouldn't it be better if Gray Fox linked to Gray Fox's own article rather than his section within the "List of characters in the Metal Gear series"-article?" At the time of this writing, said edit request has not been answered. Would you be willing to edit the Metal Gear Solid article according to my request? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.111.69.45 (talk) 18:24, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Changing list of characters in the Metal Gear series#Venom Snake to Venom Snake shouldn't be a problem, however your request also involves inter-mixing of charterers on a subject matter I know little about, so the best course would be an edit request, this way an editor with more knowledge could help with link routing. Cheers, Mlpearc Phone (open channel) 19:13, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In case you don't already know: [10]. Sundayclose (talk) 16:49, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Sundayclose: Thank you for the poke, (especially because I did not receive a mention notification , strange :P ) Yes, I am aware, this edit caught my eye on my watchlist. Mlpearc (open channel) 17:04, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

---

The page above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.