Misplaced Pages

User talk:DocKino: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 04:19, 2 February 2010 editJohn Cardinal (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers31,910 edits Done for now...: new section← Previous edit Latest revision as of 00:37, 27 February 2023 edit undoHog Farm (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators55,748 edits FAR for Sex Pistols: new sectionTag: New topic 
(232 intermediate revisions by 91 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{archive box|auto=yes}}
]


== "The" versus "the" when directly quoting a source. ==
==Punk rock==
Hi, In good faith, after the Minor Threat and Cramps photos were removed a second time, I tried to find out if your assertion that the photos caused "media clutter" was grounded in Misplaced Pages policies or guidelines. I looked in ] and in the WP:MOS (Misplaced Pages Manual of Style, section on images), and in the Music Project image guidelines. I was not able to find policies or guidelines stating that you cannot or should not have an image in a section that already has sound files. Could you please direct me to the policy or guideline that backs up your claim? Or, if it is a personal opinion or aesthetic preference, I would request that you consider that this article can be edited by other members of the Misplaced Pages community. Thank you] (]) 02:12, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


Doc, great series of edits on ] article, it is greatly improved due to your efforts. I had a question about however, specifically, changing "the Beatles" to "The Beatles" when the source Wiki is quoting (Harry, 2002, p.753) uses "the Beatles". Shouldn't we be accurate to the source, or brackets should be used to indicate we are changing the case of the "t"? Please, correct me if I am wrong.
==Neutrality of Sound Films==
Hello Kal! Please call me Mike. In response to your reverting my edits, I have specified at least three instances where a speculative, or opinionary comment was present in the article. It seems as if we have a conflict here, and I would prefer to discuss it, and possibly rather than start an edit war. The Dietrich comments on the image are entirely inappropriate for Misplaced Pages, and the mention of Jolson's popularity could perhaps use some re-wording.


P.S., If I have an en dash on my keboard where would it be? Thanks, cheers! ] (]) 04:14, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
I hope you are willing to talk about this issue.
(] (]) 00:21, 17 May 2009 (UTC))


Thanks Doc, for the speedy reply, and the advice on finding the en dash. I will defer to you and Tony in this instance, it does make logical sense to me. Thanks for your time, cheers! ] (])


== The King ==
== Image discussion concerning NFCC 8 ==


Hi. I've restored the most important parts of what I'd done to ]. I'd seen the discussion at TFA/R and should point out to you that Sandy doesn't know what she's talking about. I scrunched the whitespace as a sop to poor ways of thinking about article load time and edibility. The result was 'smaller'. ] (]) 11:47, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Would you be able to weigh in ] please? The image in question is a ] of ] and Hitler. It is being used in the article ostensibly because it aids readers' understanding of the situation. I disagree and I cited NFCC 8 when I tagged it. I now note that there is a simmering dispute about NFCC 8 itself though the main import of both wordings remains the same. I noticed you in the recent edit history of NFCC and thought that you would like to weigh in here. Thanks. ] 21:40, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


== Sourcing question ==
::I added a link on ] verifying the incident. Please have a look. Regards, --''']'''] 19:12, 28 October 2008 (UTC)


Hey Doc, hope you are having a great holiday season. I have a question I think you can answer. I bought a first edition copy of: ''The Playboy Interviews with John Lennon and Yoko Ono'', so I could replace the pageless Sheff 1981 cites in the ] article, as the link appears to be dead now anyway. Here's the question, the book is actually copyrighted to Playboy, not Sheff, and the Library of Congress page at the front of the book actually lists Lennon as the 1st author. Further, while Sheff conducted the interviews, the book was edited by G. Berry Golson. So how should this be cited to, since the interviews were conducted by Sheff, the book was edited by Golson and authored by Lennon? Also, if Lennon is an author, why would Yoko not also be an author?
==Sex Pistols==
Nice work today on the page. ] (]) 19:44, 28 November 2008 (UTC)


As of now, the ref section reads like this: Sheff, David; Lennon, John; Ono, Yoko. In: Golson, G. Berry. ''The Playboy Interviews with John Lennon and Yoko Ono.'' Playboy; 1981. {{ISBN|978-0-87223-705-2}}. But as I said, this does not seem to be accurate. How should the cites look? Thanks, Happy New Year, cheers! ] (]) 22:15, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
==WP:FILMS Questionnaire==
As a member of ], you are invited to take part in the ]. It is intended to gauge your participation and views on the project. At the conclusion of the questionnaire, the project's ] will use the gathered feedback to find new ways to improve the project and reach out to potential members. The results of the questionnaire will be published in next month's newsletter. If you know of any editors who have edited film articles in the past, please invite them to take part in the questionnaire. Please stop by and take a few minutes to answer the questions so that we can continue to improve our project. Happy editing!<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by ] (]) 03:16, 10 January 2009 (UTC)</small>


==My edits on The Clash==
== conservative/liberal/moderate ==
First of all, I am not whining, despite what you may think. It is valid to complain about reverting an entire edit when there are some improvements in it. It may not be your intention, but you are coming off to me as "snotty" right now. I am sorry if this is not your intent, but I would appreciate it if you spoke to me kindly, because all you want to do is complain about me and/or my edits... --] (]) 16:35, 7 January 2012 (UTC)


== A barnstar for you! ==
The problem I have with the statement in the United States article is that it is misleading. Yes more people identify as conservative than liberal, but there are so many moderates that lean liberal that if you were to just ask "are you conservative or liberal" , I think most people would say liberal. So if that is the case, someone reading this article could be mislead into thinking that the country is conservative as a whole, and I think if you look at this past election , this is clearly not true.


{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
==Kate Winslet==
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ]
Thanks for your efforts in cleaning up the awards section of the article. It's great. I've had all I could handle just preventing it from becoming even more than a mess. Kudos. ] (]) 02:00, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Barnstar of Diligence'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Well done sir! You have had quite a day for the Presley TFA! ] (]) 00:02, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
|}


===Template:Largest Metropolitan Areas of the United States===
== Punk barnstar ==
OK, if you insist that both NYC and LA images have the same aspect size (which I think is unwarranted for the simple reason that the NYC skyline is so much bigger and more sprawling), then will you please replace the current NYC image with something more visually appealing? I am quite unhappy that you are insisting or even just OK with leaving a poor quality image for NYC while the L.A. image is appropriately beautiful, just on the basis of an illogical size consideration. I believe that my choice actually made sense. And kindly change the moniker back to New York "City" from "New York", whose primary Wikilink is actually to the ] article.
Thank you.
] (]) 03:38, 13 January 2012 (UTC)


== RFC/U ==
]. Cheers. --] (]) 03:27, 22 March 2009 (UTC)]]


The discussion has been opened and can be found at ] ] (]) 14:09, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
== Riverside-San Bernardino ==


:Thanks for bringing this to my attention, DocKino. I will have a read over it this evening. ] (]) 22:24, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Well Its because they are both the Central City, Riverside may be larger, But San Bernardino is more important, so they sould both be named. Or why not just write in Inland Empire instead of Riverside that way thy will both take credit? (the ] is the name of the metro) ] (]) 04:52, 12 April 2009 (UTC)


== re: Jaws ==
: oK thx for your coloberation! -] (]) 02:47, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
*:Hey its me again, but there is a bit controbersy going on about the Inland Empire in the Greather Los Angeles discussion page, please take a look and write your comments on the issue by clicking ], Thank-You and ] (]) 23:34, 21 April 2009 (UTC)


I figured as much. Keep up the good work! ] (]) 06:42, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
==New image project==
:Plot summary is downright sleek--nice job. ] (]) 09:36, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. This little form letter is just a courtesy notice to let you know that a proposal to merge the projects ], ], ] and ] into the newly formed ] has met with general support at ]. Since you're on the rosters of membership in at least one of those projects, I thought you might be interested.
::No hyphen between "pneumatically" and "powered"? (just a query--I defer to your judgment...) ] (]) 04:30, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
Conversation about redirecting those projects is located ]. Please participate in that discussion if you have any interest, and if you still have interest in achieving the goals of the original project, we'd love to have you join in. If you aren't interested in either the conversation or the project, please pardon the interruption. :) Thanks. ] <sup>]</sup> 13:33, 23 April 2009 (UTC)


Is there anything you need to finish the Jaws copyedit before I nominate it for the FA again? ] ] 21:08, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
== Attitude ==
Lots of credit for getting your hands dirty on the ''Jaws'' article. ]] 22:48, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for all your help! Is the Legacy section the only part remaining? (was willing to nominate it later today, Dec 30...) 02:23, 30 January 2012 (UTC)


I did most of the ], can you take a look to see what else can be done? ] ] 14:59, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Comments help no one. Like everyone else on the project, I'm a volunteer trying to make a positive impact on the place, and like everyone else on this project (including you), I'm not perfect. ~ '''<font size="2">]'''</font><sub>]</sub><sup>]</sup> 05:19, 27 April 2009 (UTC)


== Ralph Bakshi == ==United States==
You can't undo something with adequate references just because you disagree with it. The truth is truth as sad as it is... and I would at the very least like more of an explanation then "misguided". I would like to avoid some crazy edit war so lets talk. You show me yours and I'll show you mine, figuratively speaking of course ;) ] (]) 03:34, 24 January 2012 (UTC)


== A kitten for you! ==
The article has been '''''extensively''''' researched. It's as complete and factually accurate as it could ever get. The "films" you mention are actually episodes of a television series, '']''. (] (]) 21:33, 8 May 2009 (UTC))
*I made some changes here and there. I hope I cleared things up. (] (]) 05:21, 10 May 2009 (UTC))
**Made some more changes. (] (]) 22:33, 10 May 2009 (UTC))


]
*I made the changes you requested. Could you please strike your opposition of the FAC? (] (]) 03:12, 12 May 2009 (UTC))
There should really be a puppy option too.


*I finished making the changes that you have requested. Please strike your opposition. (] (]) 16:33, 12 May 2009 (UTC)) ] (]) 06:11, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
<br style="clear: both"/>
:Ask and ye shall receive: {{tlx|Puppy}}! — <span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;">''']''' &nbsp; <span style="white-space:nowrap;">]〈°⌊°〉</span> <small>].</small></span> 21:01, 7 February 2012 (UTC)


== ] ==
::The article has been copyedited by ] and ], and is awaiting further copyediting. Would you reconsider your view? (] (]) 02:50, 15 May 2009 (UTC))
''Revert good faith photo addition. The narrative is in the middle of his life here--a memorial is out of place.'' - Hi Kal, it means exactly the middle of his life - look at the Foto: 1958 - 1960 - and with the Ray Barracks in Friedberg exactly a station of his life. :)--] (]) 08:07, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
:::The article has received more copyediting by ], who says that the article did not need much copyediting. Please strike the oppose. (] (]) 02:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC))
:::It's not strictly true to say that I copyedited this article; I simply fixed a few obvious MoS problems and listed a few examples of other things that needed to be done on the FAC review page. I thought that I'd also made my opinion clear at the FAC that the article was in need of a thorough copyedit. --] ] 19:51, 17 May 2009 (UTC)


== Thanks ==
*You need to do better than to request specific changes and then refuse to cooperate to implement these changes. Every effort has been made to improve the article, and the text was well-above standard, but you never bothered to review the latest revision of the article. (] (]) 20:16, 16 May 2009 (UTC))


<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:9px;" class="plainlinks">]
*Two copyeditors saw no problems with the article. I probably would have more eager to help implement the changes you requested sooner if you weren't as rude and uncooperative as you were. (] (]) 03:18, 17 May 2009 (UTC))
SMcCandlish has given you a ]! Puppies promote ] and hopefully this one has made your day better. Your puppy must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a puppy, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
<p>Spread the goodness of puppies by adding {{tls|Puppy}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message.</p>
<p>'''Kinda made my day. It's barely past noon for me, and it's already been a long and lame one. Aside from your back-pat. :-)''' — <span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;">''']''' &nbsp; <span style="white-space:nowrap;">]〈°⌊°〉</span> <small>].</small></span> 19:58, 7 February 2012 (UTC)</p>
{{clear}}
</div><!-- Template:Puppy -->


{{clear}}
*This is what I was talking about. By treating others this way, you make them want to talk to you even less. (] (]) 21:29, 17 May 2009 (UTC))


== February 8 ==
*The article has received another copyedit which I believe covers the problems you brought up in the last FAC. (] (]) 17:22, 26 May 2009 (UTC))


{{Talkback|Mmyers1976}}
*I clarified the remaining issues. (] (]) 17:21, 30 May 2009 (UTC))


== Barnstars! ==
*The statement about the film's reception is backed up by the cited source, which says that the reviews were largely positive. I added another source backing up the film's positive critical reception. Also, Barrier's overview of the making of ''Fritz the Cat'' is cited in the discussion of Bakshi replacing Shamus Culhane twice. (] (]) 18:05, 30 May 2009 (UTC))


{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #ffffff;"
== Holding Spot ==
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | {{#ifeq:{{{2}}}|alt|]| ]}}
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Cleanup Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | For all your work in ], which now reads better than ever! You may even add yourself as a ] if you want so! ] ] 01:53, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
|}


==Ramones==
Jungian reflections within the cinema: a psychological analysis of sci-fi and fantasy archetypes
by James F. Iaccino


Hi Dockino,
Space and beyond: the frontier theme in science fiction‎
by Gary Westfahl


Re your comment in reverting edits on the Ramones page as follows:-
Star trek and sacred ground: explorations of Star trek, religion, and American culture
by Jennifer E. Porter, Darcee L. McLaren


'Revert. Sorry, but we are not allowing the Influence section to be turned into a sloppy trivia bank.'
Religions of Star Trek‎ - Page 4
by Ross Shepard Kraemer, William Cassidy, Susan L. Schwartz


Some comments:-
Matters of gravity: special effects and supermen in the 20th century
By Scott Bukatman


1) When you say we, could you please clarify who it is that you are speaking for on top of yourself? I don't see on there that anyone has stated that they are giving you authority to speak for them


2) Please bear in mind that wikipedia guidlelines state that wikpedia pages are not owned by individuals. Thus you do not own the Ramones page. Agreement on edits on pages in wikipedia are based on consensus rather than one person looking to steamroller there views when there are others making up a majority alternative opinion. There are others who agree that the influence sections needs a tidy up. The tidied up edit I have added is more structured as opposed to the previous version which has no apparent line of structure and just looks amateur and messy.
Adaptations: from text to screen, screen to text
By Deborah Cartmell, Imelda Whelehan


3) Please refrain from edit warring. As mentioned above, individuals do not own wikipedia pages. Please work with others in a constructive manner rather than edit warring with abrupt, point of view comments that often give no indication of any wikipedia guidelines supporting the view point.
== House FAc ==


Thank you for any constructive and consensusly agreed work you can bring to wikipedia.
Hi, I don't know if you keep FAcs on your watchlist (in which case this message would be redundant), but I have replied to your comments on the ''House'' FAc. It would be great if you could take another look. Thanks.--]]] 13:04, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
:Hi again, I don't mean to bother you, but it has been quite around the ''House'' FAc and I have adressed all of your comments. It would be great if you could reply. Thanks.--]]] 10:39, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
::Hi, I was about to send you a message about how I was in a position where I couldn't do anything about the image because there were users opposing to the images as well as supporting the image. However, as I read the page I realized that there were only two users really against the image, Fasach Nua and Bignole. Further discussion regarding the image takes place on the FAc page.--]]] 12:38, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
:::I'll problably renominate it today or tomorrow, there's no waiting period right? One question though, did you merge the spin-off section with the recurring characters section? If so, why? That's it, have nice day.--]]] 12:43, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
::::My bad, I just noticed your talk page comments, I'll see what I can do about the critical reception.--]]] 13:04, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
:::::What exactly should be done about the critical reception section?--]]] 15:33, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
::::::Added some info; I'm planning to add some more regarding reception of seperate seasons, but you can take a look at how it looks so far. Later.--]]] 20:09, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
:::::::I'm finished, could you take a look and give me some feedback before it goes back to FAC? Thanks.--]]] 10:00, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
::::::::The article is at FAC ]. Thank you for your help.--]]] 13:24, 7 June 2009 (UTC)


] (]) 10:47, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
== Reviews ==


Hello, I just wanted to drop by and thank you for your thorough work in FAC. Are you new to the area? I don't recall seeing you around until a month or so ago. At any rate, welcome. We always need substantive and conscientious reviews. --] ] 17:32, 16 May 2009 (UTC)


Hi Dockino,
:Hi; I'll echo the comments, and not just because of your kind words and invaluable input at ] (I forgot thank you, btw); we can never have too many good reviewers who are willing to spend time thoroughly and calmly engaging with nominators, especially those who feel slighted by a well-considered oppose. I hope you'll stick around. All the best, ] <sup>] • ]</sup> 22:38, 16 May 2009 (UTC)


This is an attempt at humour on your part surely? The only person who has objected to this change is you. As well as me, there is another person if you go through the hist who has agreed that this section of this page needs to be improved.
==Welcome to ]==
<div style="background: lightyellow; border: 1px solid #aaa; padding: 0.5em; margin: 0.5em auto;">
]
Hello! I noticed that you've been reviewing nominations at ]. Thank you for your help, and I hope you will continue to contribute! You may already be familiar with the FAC criteria by now, but in case you aren't, you can check out the ]. Also, the following dispatches are useful for reviewing nominations:


The reasons you have given for reverting these edits have been only your point of view and there has been no wikepedia guidelines brought to the table to support your view. At the moment this appears that you think that you own this page and have the right do on here as you wish. Misplaced Pages states that individuals do not own pages. The reasons put forward by you against the edits I made are poor. The reponse you have given above appears aloof, self important and does not demonstrate any sort of desire or inclination to try to work together with others.
* ''']'''
* Reviewing images (] / ])
* ]


Again, please do not edit war.
The best way to learn is by doing, but here is a quick reference of the things to check for each nomination you review:
] (]) 12:18, 18 February 2012 (UTC)


PS Please see the update above by IllaZilla (talk) 19:04, 20 December 2011 (UTC), stating that the influences section needs a tidy up.
{| width=850
|-
|{{show
|Quick reference
|
{{Misplaced Pages:Featured article criteria}}


'''Useful links'''


Hi Dockino,
] &bull; ] &bull; ] &bull; ]
|-
}}
|}


Interesting reply. So let me get this right. If someone makes an edit, its OK for you to undo it. If someone else undoes your edits, its edit warring?
Thanks again for your help! I look forward to continuing to work with you at FAC, and if you have any questions don't hesitate to ask me or ]. Now get to ]! ] (]) 19:23, 16 May 2009 (UTC)


You may well have some stars added to your history. You also have on there a list of complaints regarding your uncollaborative and dogmatic challenging of other people's work. Further your response above supports the previous comment I added above, namely that your edits are self important and aloof and not geared towards collaborative working. To repeat again, wikipedia guidelines state that no one owns wikipedia pages. You are the only person who has challenged this edit so far despite it being on almost 200 watch lists. Further to repeat again, there has been a comment stating that the influences section needs a tidy up. This means that at present your view is against the consensus so far stated.
</div>


I have asked you before and this has been ignored. Please let me ask again. Can you please explain with detail why exactly the edits made are non beneficial? You clearly have a high regard for your abilities, could you please demonstrate how good they are by giving a detailed explanation of why the edit in question is devalueing the section in the article? As stated above, the only change that has been made is to break the content down into three structured sub sections. All of the content and references are exactly as before. However the proposed changes takes away the rambling non structured format, to some degree at least. Regardless of how many stars you have or anything else, you do have any higher authority to allow you to over ride the opinions of others when your view is the minority opinion. Do you honestly believe that you are perfect and nothing you do can be improved upon?
== Re: Tender Mercies ==


Also could you please explain why my actions have nothing to do with the input of illazilla? Illazilla made a constructive suggestion that one of the sub sections was too small. I have acted upon that and merged a couple of sections together. Its called collaborative working.
Thanks for the message, and yes, I do intend to renominate it as soon as I finish the Themes section. I've ordered some books that I think/hope will contribute to it, and I want to take one more look at the library for any good print sources I could use for the article. I've also responded to both of your comments on the talk page. Thanks! — <b>] ] <small><sub>(])</sub></small></b> 22:15, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


Could you please answer the previous question I also asked, namely when you said 'we' in one of your previous talk page updates, who are you speaking for please?
== Jackie Robinson FAC ==


Your repeated undoing of the changes I have attempted to constructively apply with what is currently majority backing represents edit warring on your part.
I'll take another look at the images tomorrow, but I'm more of a prose/MoS reviewer than an image expert. Therefore, I asked ] if he could take a look at it. Will do the best I can, though. Please keep up your great work in these reviews. ''']''' (]) 01:42, 30 May 2009 (UTC)


] (]) 13:53, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
== Barrier ==


== Hi, you don't know me ... ==
Sorry, the citation was linking to the wrong page. Whereas it should have piped to , it ended up linking by mistake. (] (]) 21:55, 30 May 2009 (UTC))


I've spent quite a while looking through the comments at your RfC/U, and the diffs, and so on, and as I've never interacted with you personally (and also as I just think it's better) I've decided to talk to you here rather than leave or endorse any comments over there. I hope that's OK with you.


I can easily understand the problems that Real Life can cause us, and how it can spill over into WikiLand despite our best intentions. I've found the reverse to be true, as well: WikiStress can affect our ability to deal at our best in Real Life. It can get to be a vicious circle, sometimes. I personally have some health issues (waiting for surgery) which mean I'm in almost constant pain (and regular morphine!) neither of which is really conducive to maintaining a good mood or really thoughtful editing. I'm also full-time carer for a frail, elderly parent with advanced dementia. So, I really do understand what Real Life issues can do to us. I had a really nasty spat on Wikpedia back in December, which I found quite horribly stressful (I almost quit altogether), so I can also appreciate the stress of having the RfC/U going on. You have my sympathy, on both fronts. I'm also an ], which can occasionally complicate matters; My interactions with other people don't always go the way I expected!
== United States ==
Hey Cal! I am writing is to let you know that there will be <b>no more</b> ] edits from me!!<br>
Thanks for reverting my inappropriate rubbish, comrade. No sarcasm intended here. I will now try to find something else to do. Have you any positive suggestions? <small><span style="font-family:comic sans ms;border:1px solid crimson;padding:1px;">] ] </span></small> 20:31, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


I wrote an ], from my own experiences, which I think you might possibly find helpful to read. (Of course, I could be wrong.) You're possibly sick and tired of people talking to you about this subject, but please be assured that my intentions are good, and I mean you nothing but good. I apologise in advance if I'm out of line here; I just thought that maybe a few words from a completely uninvolved editor might help the situation. All the best, ] (]) 08:10, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
DocKino: Please see ]. --] (]) 03:59, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


== Project Punk Newsletter: February 2012 (Volume III, Issue I) ==
== House TV.com reference ==
{| style="border: 1px solid blue;background:#DCDCDC" align="center" cellpadding="4"
! style="background:#FF00FF; color: white;" colspan="2" | Announcements and news for '']''
|-
| align="left" |
<big>'''February 2012''':</big>
<br /><br />
'''Updates''':
* A ] to list the shared resources of our project has been created. If you own any books that you use frequently in your editing and that you are willing to share please add them to the list.
* An article has been proposed for the ], as part of ]. If you wish to, please express your opinion or propose an article at the collaboration page.
* {{User|Benzband}} has started to tackle the ] backlog. There is more information on ] if you want to get involved.


'''Articles'''
I'm pretty sure TV.com (as well as IMDb) is strongly discouraged as a reliable source since it allows users to submit information to the website (much like Misplaced Pages does). I'm pretty sure during featured article reviews references from those two sites are weeded out. So it's probably best to find a different reference for the new information you added. It's probably accurate information but I think a different reference needs to be found for it. ] (]) 18:23, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
* Work has been ongoing over the past few months to clean up both halves of the ]


'''Features'''
== June 2009 ==
* If you see a ], ], list ] that lives up to the corresponding featured criteria, please nominate it.
|}
<small>Delivered by ] (]) on behalf of ]. You are receiving this because your user name is listed in ] or on our ]. If you would like to stop these sorts of updates please remove the userbox from your profile, remove the category from your profile, and/or move your name down to the Inactive/former members section of the ]. Thanks.</small><br>


&nbsp;I thought you might be somewhat interested in this&nbsp;16:41, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
First of all, as you were giving me the 3RR warning, you reverted me for the 3rd time today, thus bringing yourself to the verge of violating it as well. I have already listed my explanation as for the grammatical correctness (or the lack thereof) of DCGeist's addition: the word combination ''what one scholar calls this'' is garbled and though not entirely incorrect, such phrases are better reworded for Misplaced Pages's aesthetic quality. Moreover, as I have been telling DCGeist from the beginning, this addition puts the unduly weight on the fact that '''one scholar and one scholar alone said these words''', hence inadvertently promoting a non-], skeptical outlook on the subject matter of the quote by using ]. Is there a good reason for you to insist on that version, other than siding with DCGeist? Did they email you asking for help? (By the way, this is one of the reasons I don't have an account.) After all, we are all here to improve articles with positive, good-faith contributions. ] (]) 18:21, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
:I have explained '''in detail''' why my edit is grammatically better, while you have been simply reiterating your statement. I am not here to get into these edit war games, nor do I want to summon other editors to help me in these childish ordeals. We all have better things to do &ndash; still, I would like to receive an explanation as for why you keep insisting that DCGeist's version is more correct. ] (]) 17:49, 18 June 2009 (UTC)


== RfC/U ==
==RfC on ] lead image alignment==
A ] has been opened to discuss the issue of alignment of the lead image on the ] article. Because you have previously commented or been involved with this issue at ], your input is requested. Please stop by ] and leave any feedback you may have. Thank you. ] (]) 03:17, 18 June 2009 (UTC)


Just FYI: I've started the clock on closing the RfC/U about you. There is a request that you respond to one point, but that will not hold it from closing. Thanks, ] (]) 20:24, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
== Apologies ==
==Talkback==
{{talkback|Hasteur|RfC/U on me|ts=13:29, 24 February 2012 (UTC)}}
] (]) 13:29, 24 February 2012 (UTC)


== Restructuring at The Beatles ==
It's becoming more and more clear that I was absolutely wrong in our disagreement on the ] page. Please accept my apologies for both my misunderstanding of policy (regarding ]), and regarding the actual facts of the matter. ] 22:54, 21 June 2009 (UTC)


Did you at least give it a chance? I really think it makes more sense and flows/reads better. ] (]) 09:27, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
== Metrication in the United States ==
Can you at least give me some reasons why you disagree? I'm sure we could find a middle ground. ] (]) 01:51, 26 February 2012 (UTC)


== Nicely put ==
<b>A disgusting comment has been placed on the Metrication in the United States talk page. Can you remove it?</b>


I don't normally comment on people's edit summaries but I did enjoy the one that accompanied ... Cheers, ] (]) 07:22, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
There are two principal reasons why the United States of North America has been unable to change to a sensible measurement system that 200 / 203 countries use.<p>
1. The financial cost of such a change would probably cripple a weakening economy.<br>
2. The average American lacks the intellect necessary to be able to handle such a change.<p>
] (]) 11:06, 27 June 2009 (UTC)


== Current/Past Members of the Beatles ==
== ANI notification ==


See . I'd be happy to drop this if you'd just stop edit warring. --] (]) 18:12, 29 June 2009 (UTC) There is a straw poll taking place , and your input would be appreciated. ] (]) 23:52, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
:I just reviewed this ANI entry and the article, and I have to say that I agree with Chiliad that the article reads like an essay.--] (]) 18:23, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
:Also, you've performed ] on this article today: a fourth one will result in an edit-warring block. Please bear in mind that it doesn't have to be the ''same'' reverted content to count towards the total. --] (]) 18:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


* I think I found a good solution to the template issue, take a look at , it might satisfy everyone's concerns. ] (]) 06:57, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
] Please do not ] other editors{{#if:User talk:Benjiboi|, as you did at ]}}. Comment on ''content'', not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please ] and keep this in mind while editing. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|Thank you.}}<!-- Template:uw-npa2 --> ] (]) 18:42, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


== Recent edits at ] ==
== Government leaders ==


Hope you had a great wiki holiday but its good to have you back Doc! I had a couple of questions about your recent series of edits at the Beatles.
Ah, I see your point. I forgot the Vice President counted as leader of the Senate, so I didn't quite see the parallel there before. Sorry about that.--] (]) 20:03, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


<s>1) : I changed this because in the OS, there are no spaces between the words and the dash, can we alter the punctuation of the OS without a ?</s> I see now, you fixed the error not caused it here, sorry. ] (]) 01:34, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
== ''Fritz the Cat'' ==


2) As far as quote swap: a) Lewisohn is a better source than Norman, who is a better source than Gladwell, b) the Lewisohn quote is more succint, c) we need to add back Gladwell as a source, as I removed the lower-quality sources used for only a cite or two in the article in favor of the more common and higher quality ones used through out. This trimming of obscure, sometimes out-of-print lower quality sources helped me reduce the overall size of the article by more than 13%. Thus, the article is more easily verified by the average editor/reader now that these older, hard to find, lower-quality sources are not relied upon to source basic information the high-quality sources already address, d) there is already a topical article on this subject, so the detail need not be more than the shorter Lewisohn quote IMO.
Two sources print this figure, not just ''Variety''. If you had actually looked at the article or looked at the edits before commenting, something you have never done (as evidenced by the fact that you originally wrote that you doubted that the article had been improved, and then removed the comment after seeing how much text was in the article), you would have noticed that your implication that Steve copyedited the text, and I reverted his edits, was entirely untrue - I even applied those edits about the gross to other articles - but I changed it after further research proved that I was right in the first place. By the way, one of the sources that added in that copyedit you refer to, ''Planet Cat'', was clearly sourced from Misplaced Pages, right around 2005, and God knows where that figure came from (IMDb?). You want I should add information that is clearly incorrect back into the article? (] (]) 22:05, 29 June 2009 (UTC))
*What currently appears in the article you continue to trash is factually accurate and verified. This article should be featured by now. Your comments are unhelpful and disruptive. (] (]) 00:04, 18 July 2009 (UTC))


3) I agree with trimming the "bus incident" details, there is a topical article dedicated to this era as you pointed out, but as far as changing "the" to "The" in the name chronology, well, I am not aware of any consensus to override our sources, and Lewisohn uses "the" throughout.
== Rollback ==


4) a) You can't do this much in one edit, b) I think you need to build a consensus for anyway, as no one else disliked the edited version as it was TMK, which was better sourced, more succinct and more accurate, c) you introduced numerous errors, you would need to add back the many obscure, out-of-print, and poor quality sources, and d) you can't use rollback for anything but vandalism, and that's essentially what this diff is, a rollback. ] (]) 22:26, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed you used rollback to undo by ]. The edit seems to be a good-faith edit by a new user, so a personal note on the user's talk page, along with an explanatory edit summary during your reversion, would probably be less ] than using rollback, which is intended for obvious vandalism. The fact that most of this editor's contributions seem to be constructive and all could be construed as good-faith makes this reversion using rollback even less appropriate. An explanatory edit summary and a personal note on the user's talk page would be much better. Thanks. <font color="forestgreen">]</font>&nbsp;]&nbsp;] 19:41, 29 July 2009 (UTC)


5) , why is an Academy Award not notable enough for the lead when grammys and Ivors are? To a US citizen an Oscar is better than five grammys at least, if not ten. I added it back. ] (]) 22:26, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
== August 2009 ==


== Greetings Doc ==
] Please do not ] other contributors, as you did with <span class="plainlinks"></span> to ]. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. <!-- Template:uw-huggleattack3 --> &nbsp; — ] (]&#124;]) 04:09, 8 August 2009 (UTC)


Having imposed a ban on myself having anything to do with Misplaced Pages for several months, largely for the good of my health, I've only just seen your request regarding the RfC back in January. Please don't think I ignored this. I am pleased that there have been such positive comments about your edits and I would surely have added to them. Misplaced Pages is definitely a finer place for you being a part of it. ]] 04:02, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
<div class="user-block"> ] You have been {{#ifeq:|yes|indefinitely ] from editing|{{#if:31 hours|''']''' from editing for a period of '''31 hours'''|temporarily ] from editing}}}} in accordance with ] for '''making personal attacks against ]'''. {{#ifeq:|yes||Once the block has expired, you are welcome to ].}} If you believe this block is unjustified, you may ] by adding the text <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx" argument. -->{{tlx|unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our ] first. {{#if:true|] ] ] ] &spades; 04:22, 8 August 2009 (UTC)}}</div>{{#ifeq:|yes|]}}</div><!-- Template:uw-hblock -->
{{unblock reviewed|1=Jeff G., with whom I have no history prior to nine days ago (unless he has previously or otherwise operated under a different username), began his campaign of harassment against me with this July 30 edit: . As you can see, this "last warning" tag Mr. G placed on my Talk page was unexplained, unreferenced, and not preceded by lower-level tags. The campaign resumed this evening with this edit: . Mr. G's notice here appears to be unexceptional, but the context shows that it is not. The article in question is ]. I have a long history of productive contributions to the article; Mr. G has none. I was reverting a minutes-old, small, objectively erroneous edit by an anon. Indeed I did not provide a detailed edit summary--perfectly standard practice for reverting a minor anon edit, hardly meriting a warning on my Talk page from an entirely uninvolved editor (unless, of course, that editor is watching my actions, looking for an excuse to harass me). I reverted the addition to my Talk page, referring in edit summary to the action I was reverting as "vandalism"--which, given the circumstances and recent history, is exactly what it appeared to be to me. Mr. G then began a spree of warnings on my Talk page accusing me of "personal attacks" (, , , , ), which I reverted--ultimately using intemperate language, indeed, but only in the summaries for edits ''to my own Talk page''. Beginning only after Mr. G had tagged my Talk page for the third time this evening, I also left two warnings against defamation on Mr. G's Talk page, which again seemed entirely appropriate given the circumstances. They were simple template warnings, with no additional language, let alone anything inappropriate. I cannot fathom why Mr. G has chosen to target me, but I respectfully suggest that I should be unblocked and that Mr. G should be warned against initiating contact with me in the future.|decline=Your edit summaries refer to the other editor as a "serial troll" and "mentally disturbed." Sorry, but you are going to have to sit out the block. ] (]) 12:24, 8 August 2009 (UTC)}}


== Paul McCartney FAC ==
Please be reasonable as far as the U.S. article when you return from the block.


If you can find the time, I sure could use some help with the prose. . Thanks. ] (]) 22:28, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
NZ is NOT Australia even though Americans think the two are similar. The NZ and American governments are at odds (though not to the point of hostility). South Korea is considered a much closer political ally even if the people may be culturally different from many Americans. Also, George Washington did not work or live in the White House so saying all Presidents did is wrong information that may lower a child's grade if they are writing a paper based on WP.
: Thanks Doc! I don't have the eye for prose that you do, so your help would be greatly appreciated! ] (]) 22:39, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
:: I assume you saw the responses on my talk page, but really, just edit it the best you know how. I'm sure if there is anything I disagree with we can either talk about it, or I'll just change it back, lol. Don't worry, I trust your editorial instincts and I know the article could use your skills. I do disagree with your page range edits at ] though, my reasoning is that to save one digit, you introduce much more room for error. 191-195 is clear, but 191-95 could be an error for 195, 95; or 195, 295, etectera. Just my opinion. ] (]) 01:56, 8 June 2012 (UTC)


== Beatles edit war? ==
Let's work together to get articles better! ] (]) 15:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


When you have time, I think your input would be helpful . ] (]) 02:15, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
== Ralph Bakshi FAC ==


==Paul McCartney==
All of your issues with the article have been clarified. Please strike your opposition. (22:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC))
*All of your issues have been clarified. Please strike your opposition. (] (]) 21:53, 12 August 2009 (UTC)) Sorry about that. You're right but I'd too trigger happy for my own good sometimes. ] (]) 07:26, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
**I clarified the pulp fiction statement. Please strike your opposition. (] (]) 19:52, 15 August 2009 (UTC))


== ANI Notice ==
*In ''The Animated Movie Guide'', Jerry Beck states that ''Wizards'' and ''American Pop'' were successful while discussing ''<nowiki>Hey Good Lookin'</nowiki>''. (] (]) 20:02, 15 August 2009 (UTC))


The significant issues you have brought up have been resolved. No further work is needed. (] (]) 01:16, 16 August 2009 (UTC)) Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. <!--Template:ANI-notice--> Thank you. ] (]) 08:36, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
:The FAC has been closed as not promoted. Suggest that you (Ibranoff) work with Steve and DocKino to address the issues brought up at the FAC before re-submitting. ] (]) 01:24, 16 August 2009 (UTC)


== DNR notice ==
== NowCommons: File:WB 77-Sex Pistols promo (video) (crop).jpg ==
] is now available on ] as ]. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Misplaced Pages, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Misplaced Pages, in this case: <nowiki>]</nowiki>. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --] (]) 12:32, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
<!-- ncnotifier -->


==Notice of Dispute resolution discussion==
== David Fuchs again ==
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "]". Thank you.<!--Template:DRN-notice--> ] (]) 21:43, 23 June 2012 (UTC)


==Notice of Wikiquette Assistance discussion==
Hi there. Wanted to let you know that ] again snuck in his version of the summary for '']'', complete with innocuous description and no discussion in the ]. Suggestions on what to do regarding this case of ]? ] (]) 23:21, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello, DocKino. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. {{#if:|The thread is ]. }}{{#if:|The discussion is about the topic ].}}<!--Template:WQA-notice--> Thank you. ~ ] ] 09:19, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
:If I didn't know Fuchs was deadly serious I'd almost think he is intentionally parodying a bad Misplaced Pages editor. I think you'll find my latest Talk comment quite amusing. Also, let me point out two of his previous appearances in ], in and (right after the initial contretemps regarding my ''ST:TMP'' edits, actually). Sound familiar? ] (]) 07:34, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


== ] up for deletion at commons ==
== Ramones ==


{| class="layouttemplate" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="4" style="border:0; border:2px solid #D6D0B4; background-color:#F5EAB8;"
Hi,
|-
Let me begin by pointing out that I fully recognize and admire your immense contributions to the content of ] and that my extremely minor role completely pales to insignificance by comparison. Someone had incompletely nominated the article for ] and seeing what a "small g" good article it is I thought it would be a shame to go unassessed. I had and have do desire to overstep my place in the articles history or development. If you want to address the review please do, if you would prefer discussing any changes&mdash;I can do that, or if you believe the article is fine as is and don't care if it is assessed then I'll walk away. I hate to not finish something that I've started but I'm not going to work on a futile cause either. Whatever you decide is fine by me, just let me know. <font face="Century Gothic">](])</font> 15:05, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
| ]
:Excellent, let me know what I can do to help, as long as we don't work against each other it should easily pass. <font face="Century Gothic">](])</font> 00:42, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
| ] has been listed at ] so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at ''']'''.<br />
<small>If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.</small><br />
Please remember to respond to and &ndash; if appropriate &ndash; contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
|}


Hi DocKino, i received this notice on my talkpage at Wikimedia Commons. Seeing as you uploaded the picture, i though you ought to know. ] (]) 11:10, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
== Per lead? ==


== Last revert ==
I'm curious. You removed the RS top ranking entry you had just added with an edit summary, "Sorry, per lead, give RS ranking just for those in top ten." ] doesn't say anything about that, and how does WP:LEAD apply anyway? Your edit was not to a lead paragraph. &mdash; ] (]) 21:24, 31 October 2009 (UTC)


The last revert which you have made on Elvis Presley's page, i think i agree but, still such name should be added somewhere on the page, like they have been added on the pages of ], ], ] and so on, people go ask on internet "Who Elvis has influenced except beatles, dylan" as we have put only such influences on Elvis's page. That's what the point is. ] (]) 14:38, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
:OK, I understand now. Obviously, I understood your "per lead" to mean "per ]". I agree that we don't need to mention the RS position for all their albums in the main article. &mdash; ] (]) 22:37, 31 October 2009 (UTC)


== ECs on The Beatles == == Note ==


Hi, Doc. I just wanted to let you know that there is a discussion ] to which you may be interested in contributing. Thanks! ] <sup>(]|])</sup> 02:04, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Per the FAC review, I'm trying to cleanup the citations. It's maddening to try and do that while you are also editing. (Given you are an FAC reviewer, aren't you not supposed to be editing anyway? I don't really know those rules.) Can you lay off for awhile, or should I? I'd like to get this done, but the article gets almost constant editing and systematic changes to citations are much harder under those conditions. &mdash; ] (]) 05:21, 3 November 2009 (UTC)


== The Beatles DRN thread ==
:I assume by your lack of an answer that you will finish cleaning up the citations. &mdash; ] (]) 05:58, 3 November 2009 (UTC)


Hi DocKino. I closed the ] about The Beatles which you were involved in, because it was inactive for almost two weeks. If you want to carry on with dispute resolution after you come back to editing, just leave a note on ] and I'll reopen the dispute resolution thread for you. (Or you could just file a new case, or un-archive the old case, if you prefer - it's up to you.) You are very much encouraged to use the noticeboard again if you think it would help. And if you have any questions about any of this, just ask. Best regards — ''''']''''' <sup>(])</sup> 05:00, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
:'''Update''' broke multiple sources that have short footnotes in the article but now have no entry in the References section. &mdash; ] (]) 13:21, 3 November 2009 (UTC)


== Change to Presley article ==
== Retraction requested ==


Hi. I recently made a change to ] that I think I should run by you, being one of the article's main contributors, ]. I made the edit before proposing it b/c I thought showing it would get my proposal across better. ] (]) 23:22, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
In two edits on ] (, ) you described me as incoherent, ignorant, and lazy, among other things. I am formally requesting that you retract those comments and strike them on the talk page. I don't appreciate being insulted and it's not appropriate for those uncivil remarks to stand, especially on the talk page for an article that I have invested many hours to help improve. &mdash; ] (]) 14:12, 3 November 2009 (UTC)


== Ffd Discussion ==
:Did you see to on my talk page? I try to keep discussions in one place and so I replied there rather than here. The summary:
:*I did not intend the the way you took it.
:*I would still like you to retract/strike-out the comments on ].
:If you are not going to retract your comment, please say so. Given it's been more than a day since I made my request, I suspect I have your answer. &mdash; ] (]) 22:50, 4 November 2009 (UTC)


An image I added to Jaws after your suggestion ], can you offer an insight? ] ] 04:52, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
::Thanks for striking the comments on The Beatles talk page. I trust you have seen that PL290 provided his point of view on our dispute. He interpreted my initial edit conflict message similar to the way you did, and given that, it's clear I need to try harder to avoid making comments that can be interpreted as criticism. I sincerely hope that we can work productively together in the future without those interactions being tainted by this episode. &mdash; ] (]) 15:19, 5 November 2009 (UTC)


== Award == == Happy New Year! ==


{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;" {| style="border: 3px solid purple; background-color: #FFFFFF;"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ] |rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ]
|rowspan="2" | |rowspan="3" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Reviewer's Barnstar ''' |style="font-size: large; color: Purple; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''Best wishes for the New Year!'''
|- |-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 2px solid Plum;" |Here's wishing you and yours a joyous, healthful, and productive 2013! <p>Please accept a belated thank you for the well wishes upon my ], and apologies for the false alarm of my the well wishes extended me were most kind, but I decided to return, re-committed, when another blocked sock was revealed as one of the factors aggravating the ] pages this year. </p><p>Maintaining standards in featured content requires vigilance, dedication and knowledge of people like you, who are needed; reviews are always welcome at ], ] and ]. but here's hoping that 2013 will see a peaceful road ahead and a return to the quality and comaraderie that defines the ] process, thanks to many dedicated Wikipedians!<br />
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | For your phenomenal input to ] at FAC, your exhaustive efforts to improve the article's coverage and accuracy before the review ended, backed up by countless hands-on fixes, your skilful diplomacy during the review, and your willingness to work collaboratively with other editors to resolve issues afterwards.<br />Thank you! ] (]) 20:15, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
] (]) 20:38, 3 January 2013 (UTC)</p>
|} |}


== Main page appearance: Tender Mercies ==
== Recent comments ==


This is a note to let the main editors of ] know that the article will be appearing as ] on March 19, 2013. You can view the TFA blurb at ]. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director {{user|Raul654}} or his delegates {{user|Dabomb87}}, {{user|Gimmetoo}}, and {{user|Bencherlite}}, or start a discussion at ]. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you can change it—following the instructions at ]. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:
The latest edits show that ''Unfiltered'' isn't the only source being used. Several citations were added backing up information which is also stated in ''Unfiltered''. (] (]) 03:12, 9 November 2009 (UTC))
*I'm not lazy enough to decry the lack of reviews of a film that has zero coverage on ''Rotten Tomatoes''. Lazy indeed. (] (]) 00:54, 10 November 2009 (UTC))
*When do you intend to strike your opposition? (] (]) 20:23, 11 November 2009 (UTC))


<blockquote>
*I am just reminding you that you have not commented on the article in three days. (] (]) 01:14, 22 November 2009 (UTC))
''''']''''' is a 1983&nbsp;American drama film. ] plays Mac Sledge, a recovering alcoholic ] singer who seeks to turn his life around through his relationship with a young widow and her son in rural ]. Duvall, who sang his own songs in the film, drove more than {{convert|600|mi|km|0}} throughout the state, tape recording local accents and playing in country music bands to prepare for the role. He and director ] repeatedly clashed during production, at one point prompting Beresford to walk off the set and reportedly consider quitting. Themes include the importance of love and family, the possibility of spiritual resurrection amid death, and the concept of redemption through Mac Sledge's conversion to Christianity. Following poor ] results, distributor ] made little effort to publicize ''Tender Mercies'', which Duvall attributed to the studio's lack of understanding of country music. Although unsuccessful at the box office, it was critically acclaimed and earned five ] nominations, including one for ]. ''Tender Mercies'' won Oscars for ] for ] and ] for Duvall. {{TFAFULL|Tender Mercies}}
</blockquote>
] (]) 23:01, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
{{clear}}


== Advice? ==
*What are you talking about? I ''did'' address all concerns. Are you intentionally trying to avoid admitting that you were wrong in sabotaging every FAC nomination this article has had thus far for your own petty, unprovoked bias against me? This article should be featured. It exactly meets the standards. It's perfect. Support it. Strike your opposition. Now. (] (]) 18:07, 22 November 2009 (UTC))


Hi- you gave me good advice a couple of years back, about the placement of images. Can you kind of help mentor me regarding them and other issues? I've uploaded over 2,000 photos to ], and placed them but there are always new things to learn! --] (]) 14:58, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
== ] nomination of ] ==
]An editor has nominated the ] article for ]. If you have any thoughts on this matter then please add your comments to ].
Thank-you ] (]) 12:21, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


==Million Award==
== Independent/independent ==
{| style="border: 1px solid red; background-color: #FFF7F7; width: 70%;"

|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ]
I was surprised to see "independent.co.uk" as the publisher name. I assumed that "independent.co.uk" was their Internet domain, but the actual publisher name would be different. I went to the site and saw that my assumption was wrong, but the page had the first "I" capitalized. I changed ] to reflect what I found.

In general, I think the name should match the way the publisher shows it on their site when rendering it in text, i.e., if there is a stylized graphic with different fonts and colors, etc., I'll ignore that if there is also a simple(r) text version. The text version is often available in the page footer, on an "about us" page, or on a legal info page.

I didn't check "guardian.co.uk" before now, but it appears the domain is "guardian.co.uk", and they use that as a name on the site, but the publisher's name seems to be "Guardian News and Media Limited". Without doing a lot of research, the "work" (equivalent to the newspaper name) would be "guardian.co.uk" and the publisher would be "Guardian News and Media". Having said all that, I'm no expert on this stuff... &mdash; ] (]) 00:49, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

== Canada-United States Relations link ==

Thank you for pointing out that the link already existed in the same paragraph. My apologies for missing that, and I commend your ability to see and correct the egregious oversight that I made. Thank you for your assistance, and happy editing! ] (]) 00:20, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

== ] ==

Hi DocKino, it's Hunter Kahn. I don't know if you remember me, but you provided some feedback during my ] for the '']'' film entry. If you'll recall, the issues back then were a lack of a comprehensive "Themes" section and scholarly sources. I think your those issues are now resolved; I would have nominated it again long ago, but I got bogged down with some real-life matters, as well as the fact that it took me a particularly long time to track down one particular journal article I wanted. That being said, I think ''Tender Mercies'' is ready now and I've ]. I remember back in the previous nomination, you seemed to indicate you felt ''Tender Mercies'' was already very close to FA standards. Now that I've renominated it, I'm very much hoping you'll weigh in on the new FAC page. Thanks! — <b>] ] <small><sub>(])</sub></small></b> 01:49, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

== Being true to the sources can be more important than consistency of presentation. ==

Hello DocKino, Consistency is good, but often it is more important to be true to the sources. That's why I undid your edit to the article on the United States.

When the CIA and the United Nations quote the area of the United States in square kilometres, the fact that they use the metric system is as notable as the fact that their figures do not agree. It is especially notable that the CIA, an American Government instrumentality, uses the metric system. In this case, converting these figures into square miles misrepresents the sources, just as it would misrepresent the sources to change the measures so that they agree with each other. ] (]) 23:39, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

== Bakshi proposal ==
Could you please enter your thoughts ]? Thanks, ] (]) 18:13, 24 November 2009 (UTC)


==File source problem with File:WB 77-Sid Vicious promo.jpg==
]
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following . '''Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged''', as described on ]. If the image is copyrighted under a ] (per ]) then '''the image will be deleted ] after 23:48, 24 November 2009 (UTC)'''. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no source-notice --> ] (]) 23:48, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

== Tender Mercies question ==

Hey, I saw your latest query at the Tender Mercies FAC. I am at work right now, but will address it when I get home. In the meantime, I had a question for you. As you probably saw, I added the audio clip of Duvall singing. Since actress Betty Buckley also did her own singing (and since her song "Over You" was nominated for an Oscar), do you think it would be worthwhile to include a brief audio clip of her singing "Over You" along with the Duvall clip? Or do you think having two would be a fair-use issue? Since it's two separate actors, and since the fact that both sand their own songs are addressed in the article, I thought it would be OK, but wanted your opinion before I added the clip... — <b>] ] <small><sub>(])</sub></small></b> 19:07, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
*Thanks, I'm really happy with how the audio clips have come out in this article. I've never done this in a Misplaced Pages article before, so thanks for all your guidance with them. And yeah, I agree with you about "Over You". lol — <b>] ] <small><sub>(])</sub></small></b> 02:48, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
**Hey, thought I'd seek your opinion on something. When going through the DVD documentary thing to check a quote, I noticed that it included still (black and white) photos of Duvall and Foote accepting Oscars. I was wondering if you thought a screengrab of the Foote Oscar photo would be a good addition and would work as a fair use rationale. Let me know what you think... — <b>] ] <small><sub>(])</sub></small></b> 04:38, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

== Barnstar ==

{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ]
|rowspan="2" | |rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Copyeditor's Barnstar''' |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Million Award'''
|- |-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | For a thorough, rigorous copy edit on '']'', which was crucial in getting the article to FA and made an unquestionably positive impact on the entry. Your help with image and audio fair use rationales was also highly appreciated. My sincere thanks! — <b>] ] <small><sub>(])</sub></small></b> 05:55, 5 December 2009 (UTC) |style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | For your contributions to bring ] (estimated annual readership: 4,174,000) to ] status, I hereby present you the ]. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Misplaced Pages's readers. -- ] (]) 11:45, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
|} |}


The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Misplaced Pages's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at ]. You're also welcome to display this userbox:
== Feedback request ==

I'd value your opinion about something. As you have a lot of experience as a FAC reviewer, and I've only managed to find time to review a handful of FACs so far, I think you are in a good position to judge the way I've handled my oppose at ]. This is not an attempt to solicit input to that FAC per se, just a request for feedback on how you think I've handled it, to help my personal development and effectiveness in future FACs. I don't like to oppose, and in fact this is the first time I've done so; I'm (perhaps needlessly) left questioning whether I've come down too hard on the nominator, and whether I need (heaven forbid) more practice at opposing, to develop greater diplomacy in interpreting and responding to nominators' comments. One of my objections (now stricken) concerned the suitability of a source and consequent assertions made in the article; after a counter-challenge, my objection was accepted and fixed, but my other objections continue to be challenged and the discussion seems to me to have deteriorated. As things stand, I doubt the value of making any further response, as side-issues appear to be dominating and risk clouding the principles of my stated objections. If it's possible for you to take a look and let me know, honestly, how you think I've handled it (and, if you want, any other FAC you're aware of that I've contributed to), I'd be very grateful. Note that in the FAC in question I've also joined in the discussion of at least one other reviewer's response (which I did after my oppose). If you'd prefer not to do this for any reason, no problem, just say no. Thanks! ] (]) 02:52, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

== Just wanted to say ... ==

... that I think you're doing a great job at ] FAC. --] ] 22:20, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
:Ditto to that! Many thanks for your work, which has vastly improved the article. Same goes to Malleus Fatuorum! Thank you for helping me get the page to what it is now. Though it looks like the FAC will be unsuccessful, I'll try to work on it as best as I can over the next few weeks, then perhaps I'll renominate it. - ] (]) 18:54, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

== Penguin dictionary/British English ==

So if it's not true that British English demands "-ise" for certain words like maximize (in American English), is that why the dictionary says "UK usually ___ise" for the words in question that I changed on ] article? ] (]) 23:55, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

== The Beatles and UK-English variant ==

The Oxford English Dictionary includes a lot of variant spellings, but generally British English utilises the "s" rather than the "z". Moreso, the MoS denotes that subjects peculiarly or generally related to one of the English speaking cultures should use the typical word and grammatical structures of that language. I would suggest that you self revert, since Brits can generally be trusted to know how things are commonly spelled in their native language. Thanks. ] (]) 23:59, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
:Hmmm... I got a ] ] in English language back in 1976, and have been speaking the lingo since the early 60's and writing in it for my living since 1978. Of course, I could read a book which says that I may spell words with a "z" and I can also read books which detail peoples real life stories on how they were abducted by aliens. Or. Just because it says you can do "x" (or "z" in this matter) does not mean you must. Another point - giving out advice; it is what admins and other experienced editors do. It is supposed to be how Misplaced Pages works. Of course, if you want me to comply with the stereotype of WP admins I could just block you for your rudeness at my talkpage. As ever, I like to give the other party the choice... ] (]) 00:17, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
::I have something of an expertise; so how close am I getting through to you? ] (]) 00:30, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

== Talkback notice ==

{{talkback|Talk:The Kinks}} - ] (]) 21:31, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

== Presley article ==

Many thanks to you (and PL290) for your continuing input. Much needed and overdue. ]] 08:31, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Just got back home and had a look at the Presley article. You have no idea how pleased I was to view your recent contributions to this article. Hope the two of you will stick around for awhile.--] (]) 23:26, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

== 000 dead ==
If you really do not believe reports on the loss of civilian life, then you are either perfect example of stupidity or naivete associated with a stupid patriotism and fanaticism --] (]) 17:33, 28 December 2009 (UTC)


What right have you give me an ultimatum? I have the right to write true infromace about this country.
Why is it on wikipedia sponsored censorship and manipulation of the facts?

And then you still have the audacity to threaten someone who writes true, but unfortunately "politically embarrassing" information. --] (]) 17:47, 28 December 2009 (UTC)


You just plain fanatics, stupid stupid herd member, a victim of "brainwashing"

if you are U.S. resident, I give you a better proposal for a flag for your country - this flag would be better suited to her:
]
--] (]) 18:13, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

:Why is this creature not blocked yet, DocKino?! I watch pages and rarely comment, but this is ridiculous! Block this moron, already!!! ] (]) 18:18, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

==Elvis Presley==
It seems as if we have a content dispute. I will leave it for now, but I do not agree with some of your recent edits. In my opinion, well-sourced contributions by other users should not be deleted. ] (]) 09:13, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

== Stop! ==

Please do not leave nonsense on my page about reverts. I know your a huge Elvis fan but dont be hypocritcal when you edited just as much as me. Should I post the same thing on your page? I have right to edit just like you regardless of how long you have been editing. ] (]) 00:41, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

You can continue to post as you like on page as well just remember I have left a comment on the talk page you havent. Just remember your step away from being blocked. So before you come with your nonsense to my page see my explantation on the Elvis talk page. ] (]) 00:53, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

== Concerning the "Photo-Drama of Creation" on the "Sound Films" Page... ==

I am assuming that by your statement of the paragraph being "completely unsourced", you mean that I have no references. Very well; I will give the needed references.
This message is from 96.250.154.201. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 00:52, 11 January 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

==]/]==
Hi, Doc... hope you've had a better weekend than I have here at WP! (Trouble-trouble for me!) Listen, if you haven't noticed already, at the bottom of both The Beatles and Elvis Presley pages, you will see that the categories box comes into conflict with the template and external links. This is the same for many other articles, too. I've notified WP's two developers, but have not received any word back. I presume this originated in early/mid-December when the article parameters for Misplaced Pages were changed. Also, might you check out my work on Elvis' singles template sometime. Talk to you sometime again. Best, --] (]) 00:20, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
:It could be, you know I never gave that any thought. I use Microsoft Internet Explorer 7, at least I think that's what it's called. Hmmm... Best, --] (]) 00:36, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

== ] ==

Hi, you raised comments about the quality of the prose on ] in its ] in June last year. I've recently undertaken a copyedit, at the request of ThinkBlue, the nominator, and I wondered if you would be kind enough to take a look and provide a little feedback- I wouldn't be surprised if I'd missed something, so any examples of prose needing improvement or general constructive criticism would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your time, ] ] 22:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

== Kate Winslet ==

Thanks for fixing the awards section. I tried to find where the youngest for 2 nominations had been removed before after the GAN reviewer added but couldn't. I put the progression of awards from fewer noms to 6 noms. ] (]) 04:01, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

==Just a question, DocKino==
More than once, you have deleted an accurate quote from a reputable British film magazine. As the editorial article of 1959 shows, Elvis’s “aggressively bisexual” appearance in his films was noticed long before his death. Your version of the paragraph suggests that only recent “gender studies” are of the opinion that his persona was sexually ambiguous. I hope you see the problem. By the way, there are additional sources dealing with the topic. For instance, art historian Richard Meyer has noted the homoerotic content of Warhol's picture, “Triple Elvis” of 1964. ] (]) 20:10, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
:Thanks for adding the correct author's name. In general, you are doing a very good job on ], and I like the accurateness of your contributions. However, in some cases, you have removed nice quotes that could have enlivened the article. ] (]) 21:33, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

== Promo stills ==

DocKino, would be safe to use for PD/No copyright notice Promo Stills? The photos of the Grateful Dead, Who, and Rolling Stones could prove useful in their respective articles. - ] (]) 03:42, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

==Just a question==
Are you aware that, in some cases, your attitude towards historical facts and well-sourced contributions by other users is somewhat questionable, DocKino? Not to mention your rather condescending behavior towards me because I have a more critical view than other Wikipedians. (I do not think that this is fully in line with Misplaced Pages policies.) However, in general, I am very satisfied with your edits, as they actually contribute to the improvement of the Elvis article. ] (]) 18:16, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

== ] ==

Sorry to bother you again, DocKino, but I'd like to share with you my thoughts about the future of The Kinks. I am most likely ''not'' going to re-nominate the article for GA, as it would be too long of a wait, and nothing "good" so far has come from it. I will work on the article some more, and eventually nominate it for a peer review. If everything proves satisfactory there, and you believe it to be ready, I'll post it for FAC. I will also check with Malleus Fatuorum, as he was also very active in the last FA review of the article. - ] (]) 03:36, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
:Shall I proceed with peer review? - ] (]) 04:07, 27 January 2010 (UTC)


{{User MAwardFA| Elvis Presley}}
== Misplaced Pages Admin Incident's noticeboard ==
{{-}}
If I've made any error in this listing, please don't hesitate to correct it; if for any reason you don't feel you deserve it, please don't hesitate to remove it; if you know of any other editor who merits one of these awards, please don't hesitate to give it; if you yourself deserve another award from any of the three tiers, please don't hesitate to take it! Cheers and all best, -- ] (]) 11:45, 28 August 2013 (UTC)


:I forgot I owe you one for this, too:
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. {{#if:|The thread is ]. }}{{#if:|The discussion is about the topic ].}} <!--Template:ANI-notice--> Thank you. - ] (formerly ]) <sup>]</sup> 10:30, 18 January 2010 (UTC)


{{tb|Talk:Pulp Fiction (film)|Non-free images}} :{{User MAwardFA| Jaws (film)}}
{{-}}
:Thanks again for all you do!-- ] (]) 13:20, 28 August 2013 (UTC)


== ] ==
== It's Now or Never ==


An RfC about the use of the {{tl|fairusereview}} tag on mainspace pages is in progress . From 2005 until recently, this template was added to file pages when the non-free status of the file was being discussed. In May this year it was edited so that it could be added to articles. The RfC question is: "Should the template be reverted to the , and retained only for use on file pages?"
It's time ... would one of the copyediting and reviewing kings like to be the King nominator? I believe the circumstances mean both that it's going to be fun, and that no other path than FAC is viable. I'm more than happy to take it on if that's what you'd prefer. ] (]) 11:10, 20 January 2010 (UTC)


Since you are a registered member of the ], you might have an interest in this discussion.] (]) 04:36, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
===I'm Counting on You===


== ] ==
Your well of diplomacy runs deeper than mine--a virtue that will surely be tested during this effort. (Over/under on initial demand for a "Critical voices" section: 26 hours.)


{{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/MassMessage}} ] (]) 17:29, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Go for it. You can reference me as conominator, and I'll troubleshoot while offering only excruciatingly restrained commentary. It's been fun so far, mate. With any luck... ] (]) 11:46, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692057745 -->
==Orphaned non-free image File:Blue Suede Shoes.ogg==
<span style="font-size:32px; line-height:1em">''']'''</span> Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]).


Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described in the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> --] (]) 03:25, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
== ] ==


==List of best-selling music artists==
Do you really have nothing better to do? If you genuinely have an issue with my conduct or my interpretation of policy, contact me, I'm always open to advice and both of us could benefit from any ensuing discussion. If you have advice for the poster (and please note what they are asking) then post it in the thread. Posting these ridulous snide comments really isn't helping anyone. ] (]) 18:20, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
{{uw-disruptive2|Article|subst=nosubst|demo=1}}--] (]) 08:49, 22 January 2018 (UTC)


==AN/I==
== Kinks PR and Image Query ==
] There is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. <!--Template:ANI-notice-->--] (]) 12:16, 22 January 2018 (UTC)


== January 2018 ==
It's now ]. While I'm here, I also have a question. I have in my possession an advertisement, printed by Warner Bros./Reprise Records, advertising their double-album label-wide sampler, ''The Big Ball''. The advertisement includes multiple photos of artists on Warner/Reprise, including The Kinks. I've made a high-quality scan of the ad—you can find it on ] . There are absolutely no copyright notices anywhere on the advertisement (the reverse is blank). What do you think? I'll make another high-quality scan of the Kinks image, if you like. Many thanks, - ] (]) 23:44, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
<div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px">]<div style="margin-left:45px">You have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''72 hours''' for making ]. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to ]. </div><div style="margin-left:45px">If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the ], then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx|" code. -->{{tlx|unblock|2=reason=''Your reason here &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;''}}. &nbsp;] (]) 12:20, 22 January 2018 (UTC)</div></div>
<!-- Template:uw-aoablock -->


== File:Bonzo Goes To Bitburg.ogg listed for discussion ==
== Life's rich tapestry ==
] A file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please see the ] to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you.
<span style="color:red;font-weight:bold;">This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the ] of each individual file for details.</span> Thanks, ] (]) 10:01, 29 October 2021 (UTC)


== File:PistPost8.jpg listed for discussion ==
Well. Only 10 days in, with two supports already, plus two very-close-to-supports, and two looks-good-likely-to-support-in-due-courses (taking the 2 to potentially 6 without even counting others likely to weigh in and support at any moment), versus one entirely predictable oppose--and outstanding issues currently amounting to tidying up a few Elvis Australia sources--we ''really'' weren't expecting ''that'' ... ] (]) 20:20, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
] A file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please see the ] to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you.
:Still, it doesn't really change anything. Per Sandy's closing edit comment, let's get it back up as soon as we've fixed the unaddressed issues. We owe it to the reviewers not to delay that. ] (]) 15:16, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
<span style="color:red;font-weight:bold;">This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the ] of each individual file for details.</span> Thanks, ] (]) 10:01, 10 December 2021 (UTC)


== Done for now... == == FAR for Sex Pistols ==


I have nominated ] for a ]. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the ]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are ].<!--Template:FARMessage--> ] <sub> '']''</sub> 00:37, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
I'm going a little cross-eyed on the Elvis ref work so I am going to call it a night. If you spot any ref errors, feel free to fix them, of course, but if it's not clear what's going on you can throw them in my lap. — ] (]) 04:19, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 00:37, 27 February 2023

Archiving icon
Archives

1, 2


"The" versus "the" when directly quoting a source.

Doc, great series of edits on The Beatles article, it is greatly improved due to your efforts. I had a question about this edit however, specifically, changing "the Beatles" to "The Beatles" when the source Wiki is quoting (Harry, 2002, p.753) uses "the Beatles". Shouldn't we be accurate to the source, or brackets should be used to indicate we are changing the case of the "t"? Please, correct me if I am wrong.

P.S., If I have an en dash on my keboard where would it be? Thanks, cheers! — GabeMc (talk) 04:14, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Doc, for the speedy reply, and the advice on finding the en dash. I will defer to you and Tony in this instance, it does make logical sense to me. Thanks for your time, cheers! — GabeMc (talk)

The King

Hi. I've restored the most important parts of what I'd done to Elvis Presley. I'd seen the discussion at TFA/R and should point out to you that Sandy doesn't know what she's talking about. I scrunched the whitespace as a sop to poor ways of thinking about article load time and edibility. The result was 'smaller'. Alarbus (talk) 11:47, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Sourcing question

Hey Doc, hope you are having a great holiday season. I have a question I think you can answer. I bought a first edition copy of: The Playboy Interviews with John Lennon and Yoko Ono, so I could replace the pageless Sheff 1981 cites in the John Lennon article, as the link appears to be dead now anyway. Here's the question, the book is actually copyrighted to Playboy, not Sheff, and the Library of Congress page at the front of the book actually lists Lennon as the 1st author. Further, while Sheff conducted the interviews, the book was edited by G. Berry Golson. So how should this be cited to, since the interviews were conducted by Sheff, the book was edited by Golson and authored by Lennon? Also, if Lennon is an author, why would Yoko not also be an author?

As of now, the ref section reads like this: Sheff, David; Lennon, John; Ono, Yoko. In: Golson, G. Berry. The Playboy Interviews with John Lennon and Yoko Ono. Playboy; 1981. ISBN 978-0-87223-705-2 Parameter error in {{ISBN}}: checksum. But as I said, this does not seem to be accurate. How should the cites look? Thanks, Happy New Year, cheers! — GabeMc (talk) 22:15, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

My edits on The Clash

First of all, I am not whining, despite what you may think. It is valid to complain about reverting an entire edit when there are some improvements in it. It may not be your intention, but you are coming off to me as "snotty" right now. I am sorry if this is not your intent, but I would appreciate it if you spoke to me kindly, because all you want to do is complain about me and/or my edits... --BLAguyMONKEY! (talk) 16:35, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diligence
Well done sir! You have had quite a day for the Presley TFA! Wehwalt (talk) 00:02, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Template:Largest Metropolitan Areas of the United States

OK, if you insist that both NYC and LA images have the same aspect size (which I think is unwarranted for the simple reason that the NYC skyline is so much bigger and more sprawling), then will you please replace the current NYC image with something more visually appealing? I am quite unhappy that you are insisting or even just OK with leaving a poor quality image for NYC while the L.A. image is appropriately beautiful, just on the basis of an illogical size consideration. I believe that my choice actually made sense. And kindly change the moniker back to New York "City" from "New York", whose primary Wikilink is actually to the New York State article. Thank you. Castncoot (talk) 03:38, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

RFC/U

The discussion has been opened and can be found at WP:Requests for comment/DocKino Mmyers1976 (talk) 14:09, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this to my attention, DocKino. I will have a read over it this evening. ElvisFan1981 (talk) 22:24, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

re: Jaws

I figured as much. Keep up the good work! Blake Burba (talk) 06:42, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Plot summary is downright sleek--nice job. Blake Burba (talk) 09:36, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
No hyphen between "pneumatically" and "powered"? (just a query--I defer to your judgment...) Blake Burba (talk) 04:30, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Is there anything you need to finish the Jaws copyedit before I nominate it for the FA again? igordebraga 21:08, 28 January 2012 (UTC) Lots of credit for getting your hands dirty on the Jaws article. The JPS 22:48, 29 January 2012 (UTC) Thanks a lot for all your help! Is the Legacy section the only part remaining? (was willing to nominate it later today, Dec 30...) 02:23, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

I did most of the latest comments, can you take a look to see what else can be done? igordebraga 14:59, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

United States

You can't undo something with adequate references just because you disagree with it. The truth is truth as sad as it is... and I would at the very least like more of an explanation then "misguided". I would like to avoid some crazy edit war so lets talk. You show me yours and I'll show you mine, figuratively speaking of course ;) Cloudblazer (talk) 03:34, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

There should really be a puppy option too.

Cadiomals (talk) 06:11, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Ask and ye shall receive: {{Puppy}}! — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒〈°⌊°〉 Contribs. 21:01, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Elvis Presley

Revert good faith photo addition. The narrative is in the middle of his life here--a memorial is out of place. - Hi Kal, it means exactly the middle of his life - look at the Foto: 1958 - 1960 - and with the Ray Barracks in Friedberg exactly a station of his life. :)--Neptuul (talk) 08:07, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

SMcCandlish has given you a puppy! Puppies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Your puppy must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a puppy, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of puppies by adding {{subst:Puppy}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message.

Kinda made my day. It's barely past noon for me, and it's already been a long and lame one. Aside from your back-pat. :-)SMcCandlish   Talk⇒〈°⌊°〉 Contribs. 19:58, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

February 8

Hello, DocKino. You have new messages at Mmyers1976's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Barnstars!

The Cleanup Barnstar
For all your work in Jaws (film), which now reads better than ever! You may even add yourself as a co-nominator if you want so! igordebraga 01:53, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Ramones

Hi Dockino,

Re your comment in reverting edits on the Ramones page as follows:-

'Revert. Sorry, but we are not allowing the Influence section to be turned into a sloppy trivia bank.'

Some comments:-

1) When you say we, could you please clarify who it is that you are speaking for on top of yourself? I don't see on there that anyone has stated that they are giving you authority to speak for them

2) Please bear in mind that wikipedia guidlelines state that wikpedia pages are not owned by individuals. Thus you do not own the Ramones page. Agreement on edits on pages in wikipedia are based on consensus rather than one person looking to steamroller there views when there are others making up a majority alternative opinion. There are others who agree that the influence sections needs a tidy up. The tidied up edit I have added is more structured as opposed to the previous version which has no apparent line of structure and just looks amateur and messy.

3) Please refrain from edit warring. As mentioned above, individuals do not own wikipedia pages. Please work with others in a constructive manner rather than edit warring with abrupt, point of view comments that often give no indication of any wikipedia guidelines supporting the view point.

Thank you for any constructive and consensusly agreed work you can bring to wikipedia.

Socheid (talk) 10:47, 18 February 2012 (UTC)


Hi Dockino,

This is an attempt at humour on your part surely? The only person who has objected to this change is you. As well as me, there is another person if you go through the hist who has agreed that this section of this page needs to be improved.

The reasons you have given for reverting these edits have been only your point of view and there has been no wikepedia guidelines brought to the table to support your view. At the moment this appears that you think that you own this page and have the right do on here as you wish. Misplaced Pages states that individuals do not own pages. The reasons put forward by you against the edits I made are poor. The reponse you have given above appears aloof, self important and does not demonstrate any sort of desire or inclination to try to work together with others.

Again, please do not edit war. Socheid (talk) 12:18, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

PS Please see the update above by IllaZilla (talk) 19:04, 20 December 2011 (UTC), stating that the influences section needs a tidy up.


Hi Dockino,

Interesting reply. So let me get this right. If someone makes an edit, its OK for you to undo it. If someone else undoes your edits, its edit warring?

You may well have some stars added to your history. You also have on there a list of complaints regarding your uncollaborative and dogmatic challenging of other people's work. Further your response above supports the previous comment I added above, namely that your edits are self important and aloof and not geared towards collaborative working. To repeat again, wikipedia guidelines state that no one owns wikipedia pages. You are the only person who has challenged this edit so far despite it being on almost 200 watch lists. Further to repeat again, there has been a comment stating that the influences section needs a tidy up. This means that at present your view is against the consensus so far stated.

I have asked you before and this has been ignored. Please let me ask again. Can you please explain with detail why exactly the edits made are non beneficial? You clearly have a high regard for your abilities, could you please demonstrate how good they are by giving a detailed explanation of why the edit in question is devalueing the section in the article? As stated above, the only change that has been made is to break the content down into three structured sub sections. All of the content and references are exactly as before. However the proposed changes takes away the rambling non structured format, to some degree at least. Regardless of how many stars you have or anything else, you do have any higher authority to allow you to over ride the opinions of others when your view is the minority opinion. Do you honestly believe that you are perfect and nothing you do can be improved upon?

Also could you please explain why my actions have nothing to do with the input of illazilla? Illazilla made a constructive suggestion that one of the sub sections was too small. I have acted upon that and merged a couple of sections together. Its called collaborative working.

Could you please answer the previous question I also asked, namely when you said 'we' in one of your previous talk page updates, who are you speaking for please?

Your repeated undoing of the changes I have attempted to constructively apply with what is currently majority backing represents edit warring on your part.

Socheid (talk) 13:53, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi, you don't know me ...

I've spent quite a while looking through the comments at your RfC/U, and the diffs, and so on, and as I've never interacted with you personally (and also as I just think it's better) I've decided to talk to you here rather than leave or endorse any comments over there. I hope that's OK with you.

I can easily understand the problems that Real Life can cause us, and how it can spill over into WikiLand despite our best intentions. I've found the reverse to be true, as well: WikiStress can affect our ability to deal at our best in Real Life. It can get to be a vicious circle, sometimes. I personally have some health issues (waiting for surgery) which mean I'm in almost constant pain (and regular morphine!) neither of which is really conducive to maintaining a good mood or really thoughtful editing. I'm also full-time carer for a frail, elderly parent with advanced dementia. So, I really do understand what Real Life issues can do to us. I had a really nasty spat on Wikpedia back in December, which I found quite horribly stressful (I almost quit altogether), so I can also appreciate the stress of having the RfC/U going on. You have my sympathy, on both fronts. I'm also an HFA, which can occasionally complicate matters; My interactions with other people don't always go the way I expected!

I wrote an essay on civility, from my own experiences, which I think you might possibly find helpful to read. (Of course, I could be wrong.) You're possibly sick and tired of people talking to you about this subject, but please be assured that my intentions are good, and I mean you nothing but good. I apologise in advance if I'm out of line here; I just thought that maybe a few words from a completely uninvolved editor might help the situation. All the best, Pesky (talk) 08:10, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Project Punk Newsletter: February 2012 (Volume III, Issue I)

Announcements and news for WikiProject Punk music

February 2012:

Updates:

Articles

Features

  • If you see a picture, article, list list that lives up to the corresponding featured criteria, please nominate it.

Delivered by In actu (Guerillero) on behalf of WikiProject Punk. You are receiving this because your user name is listed in Category:WikiProject Punk music members or on our participants list. If you would like to stop these sorts of updates please remove the userbox from your profile, remove the category from your profile, and/or move your name down to the Inactive/former members section of the participants list. Thanks.

 I thought you might be somewhat interested in this 16:41, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

RfC/U

Just FYI: I've started the clock on closing the RfC/U about you. There is a request that you respond to one point, but that will not hold it from closing. Thanks, Hasteur (talk) 20:24, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, DocKino. You have new messages at Hasteur's talk page.
Message added 13:29, 24 February 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hasteur (talk) 13:29, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Restructuring at The Beatles

Did you at least give it a chance? I really think it makes more sense and flows/reads better. — GabeMc (talk) 09:27, 25 February 2012 (UTC) Can you at least give me some reasons why you disagree? I'm sure we could find a middle ground. — GabeMc (talk) 01:51, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Nicely put

I don't normally comment on people's edit summaries but I did enjoy the one that accompanied this... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:22, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Current/Past Members of the Beatles

There is a straw poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 23:52, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Recent edits at The Beatles

Hope you had a great wiki holiday but its good to have you back Doc! I had a couple of questions about your recent series of edits at the Beatles.

1) Here: I changed this because in the OS, there are no spaces between the words and the dash, can we alter the punctuation of the OS without a ? I see now, you fixed the error not caused it here, sorry. — GabeMc (talk) 01:34, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

2) As far as this quote swap: a) Lewisohn is a better source than Norman, who is a better source than Gladwell, b) the Lewisohn quote is more succint, c) we need to add back Gladwell as a source, as I removed the lower-quality sources used for only a cite or two in the article in favor of the more common and higher quality ones used through out. This trimming of obscure, sometimes out-of-print lower quality sources helped me reduce the overall size of the article by more than 13%. Thus, the article is more easily verified by the average editor/reader now that these older, hard to find, lower-quality sources are not relied upon to source basic information the high-quality sources already address, d) there is already a topical article on this subject, so the detail need not be more than the shorter Lewisohn quote IMO.

3) Here I agree with trimming the "bus incident" details, there is a topical article dedicated to this era as you pointed out, but as far as changing "the" to "The" in the name chronology, well, I am not aware of any consensus to override our sources, and Lewisohn uses "the" throughout.

4) a) You can't do this much in one edit, b) I think you need to build a consensus for this diff anyway, as no one else disliked the edited version as it was TMK, which was better sourced, more succinct and more accurate, c) you introduced numerous errors, you would need to add back the many obscure, out-of-print, and poor quality sources, and d) you can't use rollback for anything but vandalism, and that's essentially what this diff is, a rollback. — GabeMc (talk) 22:26, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

5) Here, why is an Academy Award not notable enough for the lead when grammys and Ivors are? To a US citizen an Oscar is better than five grammys at least, if not ten. I added it back. — GabeMc (talk) 22:26, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Greetings Doc

Having imposed a ban on myself having anything to do with Misplaced Pages for several months, largely for the good of my health, I've only just seen your request regarding the RfC back in January. Please don't think I ignored this. I am pleased that there have been such positive comments about your edits and I would surely have added to them. Misplaced Pages is definitely a finer place for you being a part of it. Rikstar 04:02, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Paul McCartney FAC

If you can find the time, I sure could use some help with the prose. Paul McCartney FAC. Thanks. — GabeMc (talk) 22:28, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Doc! I don't have the eye for prose that you do, so your help would be greatly appreciated! — GabeMc (talk) 22:39, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
I assume you saw the responses on my talk page, but really, just edit it the best you know how. I'm sure if there is anything I disagree with we can either talk about it, or I'll just change it back, lol. Don't worry, I trust your editorial instincts and I know the article could use your skills. I do disagree with your page range edits at The Beatles though, my reasoning is that to save one digit, you introduce much more room for error. 191-195 is clear, but 191-95 could be an error for 195, 95; or 195, 295, etectera. Just my opinion. — GabeMc (talk) 01:56, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Beatles edit war?

When you have time, I think your input would be helpful here. — GabeMc (talk) 02:15, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Paul McCartney

Sorry about that. You're right but I'd too trigger happy for my own good sometimes. Britmax (talk) 07:26, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

ANI Notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — GabeMc (talk) 08:36, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

DNR notice

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "The Beatles". Thank you. — GabeMc (talk) 21:43, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Wikiquette Assistance discussion

Hello, DocKino. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Wikiquette assistance regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ~ GabeMc (talk) 09:19, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Sex Pistols GSTQ Promo.jpg up for deletion at commons

File:Sex Pistols GSTQ Promo.jpg File:Sex Pistols GSTQ Promo.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Hi DocKino, i received this notice on my talkpage at Wikimedia Commons. Seeing as you uploaded the picture, i though you ought to know. benzband (talk) 11:10, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Last revert

The last revert which you have made on Elvis Presley's page, i think i agree but, still such name should be added somewhere on the page, like they have been added on the pages of Stevie Wonder, Little Richard, Michael Jackson and so on, people go ask on internet "Who Elvis has influenced except beatles, dylan" as we have put only such influences on Elvis's page. That's what the point is. Clarificationgiven (talk) 14:38, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Note

Hi, Doc. I just wanted to let you know that there is a discussion here to which you may be interested in contributing. Thanks! Evanh2008 02:04, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

The Beatles DRN thread

Hi DocKino. I closed the DRN thread about The Beatles which you were involved in, because it was inactive for almost two weeks. If you want to carry on with dispute resolution after you come back to editing, just leave a note on my talk page and I'll reopen the dispute resolution thread for you. (Or you could just file a new case, or un-archive the old case, if you prefer - it's up to you.) You are very much encouraged to use the noticeboard again if you think it would help. And if you have any questions about any of this, just ask. Best regards — Mr. Stradivarius on tour 05:00, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Change to Presley article

Hi. I recently made a change to Elvis Presley that I think I should run by you, being one of the article's main contributors, here. I made the edit before proposing it b/c I thought showing it would get my proposal across better. Dan56 (talk) 23:22, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Ffd Discussion

An image I added to Jaws after your suggestion is on a deletion discussion, can you offer an insight? igordebraga 04:52, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Best wishes for the New Year!
Here's wishing you and yours a joyous, healthful, and productive 2013!

Please accept a belated thank you for the well wishes upon my retirement as FAC delegate this year, and apologies for the false alarm of my first—and hopefully last—retirement; the well wishes extended me were most kind, but I decided to return, re-committed, when another blocked sock was revealed as one of the factors aggravating the FA pages this year.

Maintaining standards in featured content requires vigilance, dedication and knowledge of people like you, who are needed; reviews are always welcome at FAC, FAR and TFA requests. Somehow, somehow we never ever seem to do nothin' completely nice and easy, but here's hoping that 2013 will see a peaceful road ahead and a return to the quality and comaraderie that defines the FA process, thanks to many dedicated Wikipedians!
SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:38, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Tender Mercies

This is a note to let the main editors of Tender Mercies know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on March 19, 2013. You can view the TFA blurb at Misplaced Pages:Today's featured article/March 19, 2013. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegates Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), Gimmetoo (talk · contribs), and Bencherlite (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you can change it—following the instructions at Misplaced Pages:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Tender Mercies is a 1983 American drama film. Robert Duvall plays Mac Sledge, a recovering alcoholic country music singer who seeks to turn his life around through his relationship with a young widow and her son in rural Texas. Duvall, who sang his own songs in the film, drove more than 600 miles (966 km) throughout the state, tape recording local accents and playing in country music bands to prepare for the role. He and director Bruce Beresford repeatedly clashed during production, at one point prompting Beresford to walk off the set and reportedly consider quitting. Themes include the importance of love and family, the possibility of spiritual resurrection amid death, and the concept of redemption through Mac Sledge's conversion to Christianity. Following poor test screening results, distributor Universal Pictures made little effort to publicize Tender Mercies, which Duvall attributed to the studio's lack of understanding of country music. Although unsuccessful at the box office, it was critically acclaimed and earned five Academy Award nominations, including one for Best Picture. Tender Mercies won Oscars for Best Original Screenplay for Horton Foote and Best Actor for Duvall. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Advice?

Hi- you gave me good advice a couple of years back, about the placement of images. Can you kind of help mentor me regarding them and other issues? I've uploaded over 2,000 photos to Wikimedia Commons, and placed them but there are always new things to learn! --Leahtwosaints (talk) 14:58, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Million Award

The Million Award
For your contributions to bring Elvis Presley (estimated annual readership: 4,174,000) to Featured Article status, I hereby present you the Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Misplaced Pages's readers. -- Khazar2 (talk) 11:45, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Misplaced Pages's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Misplaced Pages:Million Award. You're also welcome to display this userbox:

This editor won the Million Award for bringing Elvis Presley to Featured Article status.

If I've made any error in this listing, please don't hesitate to correct it; if for any reason you don't feel you deserve it, please don't hesitate to remove it; if you know of any other editor who merits one of these awards, please don't hesitate to give it; if you yourself deserve another award from any of the three tiers, please don't hesitate to take it! Cheers and all best, -- Khazar2 (talk) 11:45, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

I forgot I owe you one for this, too:
This editor won the Million Award for bringing Jaws (film) to Featured Article status.
Thanks again for all you do!-- Khazar2 (talk) 13:20, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Template talk:Non-free review

An RfC about the use of the {{fairusereview}} tag on mainspace pages is in progress here. From 2005 until recently, this template was added to file pages when the non-free status of the file was being discussed. In May this year it was edited so that it could be added to articles. The RfC question is: "Should the template be reverted to the pre-May 2013 version, and retained only for use on file pages?"

Since you are a registered member of the Fair Use WikiProject, you might have an interest in this discussion.Tom Reedy (talk) 04:36, 26 October 2013 (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 Misplaced Pages 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) 17:29, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Blue Suede Shoes.ogg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Blue Suede Shoes.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:25, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

List of best-selling music artists

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Misplaced Pages, as you did at Article. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

Please ensure you are familiar with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you.--Harout72 (talk) 08:49, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

AN/I

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --Harout72 (talk) 12:16, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

January 2018

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:20, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

File:Bonzo Goes To Bitburg.ogg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bonzo Goes To Bitburg.ogg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:01, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

File:PistPost8.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:PistPost8.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:01, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

FAR for Sex Pistols

I have nominated Sex Pistols for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm Talk 00:37, 27 February 2023 (UTC)