Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by TheGracefulSlick (talk | contribs) at 14:39, 7 October 2016 (Don't need this anymore). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hello, welcome to my talk page brothers and sisters, please comment below if you want to discuss anything.

Your GA nomination of The Electric Prunes

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Electric Prunes you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Garagepunk66 -- Garagepunk66 (talk) 02:40, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

I've had a go at expanding the Dave Hassinger and Annette Tucker articles. There may be one or two nuggets (!) in there that you two could think about including in the Prunes article - I'll leave it up to you. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:43, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

PS: You may like this! Ghmyrtle (talk) 23:03, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

I went in and did the addendum to the review. I placed the G.A. listing in a new template at the top of the article talk page. I'm guessing that the little bot (above) will electronically complete the classification process by removing the old junk in the templates right under the G.A. listing I put in. If the that doesn't happen, maybe I should go and do it myself (but would that get me in trouble?). As far as I am concerned the article is now G.A. and should be officially recognized as such. Garagepunk66 (talk) 18:53, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Electric Prunes

The article The Electric Prunes you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Electric Prunes for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Garagepunk66 -- Garagepunk66 (talk) 09:41, 3 July 2015 (UTC).

Congratulations on the G.A.! Garagepunk66 (talk) 00:14, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Album Cover Uploads

Thank you for your message; I don't mind helping at all. From scanning your 'talk' page, it looks like you and I have similar tastes in music. I haven't done any major writing in Misplaced Pages in quite a while (though I still make small contributions regularly), so I might be a little behind the times. Uploading an image to Misplaced Pages is a little tricky, and it took me several tries to get the hang of it, but here is some instruction that should help you: https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard . (There might be a new version of the 'upload wizard' that could make it easier than it was back when I was doing this a lot). Album covers, single covers and those kinds of things are automatically usable in Misplaced Pages; and of course, the images are very easy to find on the Internet (I usually use the 'images' page in Google). Don't worry about finding a copyright tag or whatever when you save the image from that search – as long as the image is of the front cover, you are 100% covered for 'fair use' no matter how you find the image. I should amend that to say that album/single covers are automatically usable for articles about that album or about that single; for some reason, you are not allowed to use an album cover to illustrate an article about the band. Then there is some language that you need to attach with the uploaded file to show the 'use rationale' for the image, and that you are making it under 'fair use'. This is a relatively recent image that I uploaded which has the attachments in it: https://en.wikipedia.org/File:StonePoneys-CD-2.jpg . If you open the file as though you were going to edit it, that will show the details on what you need there. You can then copy that over to the file that is created after you upload an image. I always used a previous upload to get that stuff; the layout, etc. has to be exact, or it doesn't work right. The uploading goes to 'Wikimedia' actually, not to Misplaced Pages directly, so don't let that throw you off. Good luck. Shocking Blue (talk) 10:17, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

First, I am a huge fan of the Human Expression also; that was one of the first psych CD's that I got. I hear what you are saying, and I got a lot of fulfillment with my work in Misplaced Pages. I even got an "Original Barnstar" for one of my first lengthy articles, on Mouse and the Traps. But I had a huge fight with the guardians of Misplaced Pages over my article on Milan the Leather Boy; while I finally won the war, it left a bad taste in my mouth. I loaded up articles on all of the Pebbles albums, including Highs in the Mid-Sixties – months and months of work – and they are gradually being deleted; even Pebbles, Volume 2 has been eliminated. About six months ago, I noticed that the majority of my contributions were being reverted – even one that I had put in a "disambiguation" page (I didn't understand that at all). Mind you, I wasn't changing wording; typically I was adding information. It is like people have staked out an article and have decided that they like it just the way it is, and nothing can get through. But don't mind me; that is just the way I feel based on my experience. Hopefully you are not having to go through something like that. I urge you to stick with it and keep up the good work; what you are doing is important, and it should be there 100 years from now. Shocking Blue (talk) 13:07, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Under Appreciated Rock Bands Website

What I have been doing for the last five years instead of writing in Misplaced Pages is creating posts in Facebook, and more recently, I have been putting the articles out in a website. What I call an 'under appreciated rock band' is one that does not have an article in Misplaced Pages yet. I also talk about a lot of other things in addition to the UARB. Check it out if you are interested: https://sites.google.com/site/underappreciatedrockbands/ . Shocking Blue (talk) 10:20, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Well, I am certainly glad that happened; I was wondering who had written that great article on the Magicians. I appreciate your good work! Shocking Blue (talk) 13:18, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you again. And I appreciate your trying to revive the Pebbles articles from deletion. They are going after the English Freakbeat articles also; I got a notice on English Freakbeat, Volume 3 just this month. :-( Shocking Blue (talk) 11:44, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Hey you'll notice I put a vote to keep the English Freakbeat article. So, I am confident that the article can be retained. Garagepunk66 (talk) 19:00, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Country Joe and the Fish

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Country Joe and the Fish you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Binksternet -- Binksternet (talk) 05:00, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Country Joe and the Fish

The article Country Joe and the Fish you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Country Joe and the Fish for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Binksternet -- Binksternet (talk) 22:01, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Country Joe and the Fish has been nominated for Did You Know

Hello, TheGracefulSlick. Country Joe and the Fish, an article you either created or significantly contributed to, has been nominated  to appear on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 20:39, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Country Joe and the Fish

On 29 October 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Country Joe and the Fish, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Country Joe and the Fish (pictured) was initially formed with only Country Joe and The Fish? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Country Joe and the Fish. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Thanks for helping Victuallers (talk) 00:01, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Music Machine

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Music Machine you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Garagepunk66 -- Garagepunk66 (talk) 07:20, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Music Machine to go G.A.

I have completed the review of the Music Machine article. I have now inserted the tag which lists the article as G.A., however it may take a couple of days for the bot to complete the process--i.e. inserting all of the new templates on the talk page, etc. Congratulations on the great job! Garagepunk66 (talk) 05:36, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Music Machine

The article The Music Machine you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Music Machine for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Garagepunk66 -- Garagepunk66 (talk) 22:43, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

The Music Machine has been nominated for Did You Know

Hello, TheGracefulSlick. The Music Machine, an article you either created or significantly contributed to, has been nominated  to appear on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 00:22, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

DYK for The Music Machine

On 23 January 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Music Machine, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the debut single "Talk Talk" by The Music Machine has been attributed to influencing The Doors and Iron Butterfly, as well as future punk bands? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Music Machine. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Norwegian Wood (This Bird Has Flown)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Norwegian Wood (This Bird Has Flown) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ojorojo -- Ojorojo (talk) 18:21, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Norwegian Wood (This Bird Has Flown)

The article Norwegian Wood (This Bird Has Flown) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Norwegian Wood (This Bird Has Flown) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ojorojo -- Ojorojo (talk) 16:02, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Did You Get My Reply?

I have forgotten how the user talk works; I guess I am really out of practice. :-) I made a reply in the section that you left for me; you do get those replies, right? Shocking Blue (talk) 10:23, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

A slice of Doberge cake!

Garagepunk66 (☎) has given you a slice of Dobos to enjoy! 7&6=thirteen gave me a slice, and I'm passin' one to you. Seven layers of fun, because you were so nice to mention GP66 on your main page. And, thanks for everything else.Garagepunk66 (talk) 03:47, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

P.S. In New Orleans we have our own version called Doberge cake. I need to get a better picture for the Doberge article, because they usually have more layers than the one pictured there. ]Garagepunk66 (talk) 03:50, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Forever Changes

I've just noticed how poor and thin the article on the album is. Entire books, and countless articles, have been written about it - one of the all-time great albums. I'd be willing to start making some improvements to the article - what do you think about joining in an improvement drive? Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:21, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Ghmyrtle I would be happy to help in any way I can. I have a book or two I can dig up that should lead to some more details (just gotta find them!). I could work on some of the background history and perhaps find more in-depth reviews for its reception section. Let me know how you want to divide the work and I can adjust to that. Thank you for including me in the project.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 16:36, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

The best way to start it, I think, would be simply for each of us to use whatever sources we have and gradually piece a better article together. We could use a sandbox, or simply work on the article as it stands now - I don't have a strong view on how best to do it. So long as we know we are both working to the same end and can discuss anything that arises, I don't think there should be a problem. I have a couple of books, and of course we can find good online sources. I'm not promising to start it straight away, but I'll see if I get something going in the next week or two. Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:05, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Ghmyrtle ok I got it. I need to finish an article to have space in my sandbox, so it will be a day or two before I start any editing. When that is complete, I'll focus on a little pre-history: mention the release of Da Capo, the state of the band, and Arthur Lee's relationship with his bandmates. If I recall correctly, the group was rapidly deteriorating at the time recording sessions began so it should be an interesting backdrop to the album itself. We can stay in touch and ultimately I think we will create a much more in-depth article.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 19:55, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

No problem. You can have as many sandboxes as you like of course (just call them Sandbox1, Sandbox2, etc.)! Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:11, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Ghmyrtle I added some background information to the article. Let me know how you feel about it and we can move forward. It covers the state of the band before recording sessions commenced. I think from this point on it would be more appropriate to discuss on the article's talk page if that is okay with you.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 13:30, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

All looks good so far. I have the books by Hultkrans, Barney Hoskyns, and Michael Stuart-Ware, which I can draw on - and probably some other more general ones. My problem at the moment is in finding the time to do all the things I need to do (not just on WP), so I suggest you carry on, and if I disagree with anything I'll raise it on the article talk page (or direct with you if necessary). Regards, Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:21, 2 June 2016 (UTC).

I haven't forgotten about this - it's just a question of finding the time. Can I suggest that we use a similar format to that at Marquee Moon (a featured article) - that is, Background, Recording, Music and lyrics (I suggest a song-by-song approach), Release and reception, Legacy and influence, Track listing, Personnel. I've now received the Einarson book, Forever Changes: Arthur Lee and the book of Love, which looks pretty good and reliable to me. By the way, there is an article about the creation of the album in the new August 2016 issue of Uncut, which is great to see, but a quick look suggests that it doesn't add anything new to the story. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:22, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Ghmyrtle it's fine, I actually stopped adding to the article for now because I was waiting for the same book to be delivered. I can still contribute to the reception section in the meantime. The format you suggested sounds good, I'll go back to work on the article in a day or two.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 16:39, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of L.A. Woman

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article L.A. Woman you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ritchie333 -- Ritchie333 (talk) 20:01, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of L.A. Woman

The article L.A. Woman you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:L.A. Woman for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ritchie333 -- Ritchie333 (talk) 14:40, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of L.A. Woman

The article L.A. Woman you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:L.A. Woman for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ritchie333 -- Ritchie333 (talk) 17:01, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

L.A. Woman has been nominated for Did You Know

Hello, TheGracefulSlick. L.A. Woman, an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed,has been nominated to appear on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 12:01, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

The Quiet Jungle has been nominated for Did You Know

Hello, TheGracefulSlick. The Quiet Jungle, an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed,has been nominated to appear on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 12:01, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

DYK for The Quiet Jungle

On 4 August 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Quiet Jungle, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the band The Quiet Jungle began as a house act before achieving commercial success with a novelty song composed for Toronto Maple Leafs player Eddie Shack? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Quiet Jungle. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, The Quiet Jungle), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:51, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Monks

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Monks you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Garagepunk66 -- Garagepunk66 (talk) 05:00, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

The Monks article GA review

I have started the review for the article the Monks. This process may take 7 days. Garagepunk66 (talk) 05:00, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Cheers

Hello, I see you two (you and Garagepunk66) are creating all the 60s garage band pages I once intended to create but because of lacking of online sources (back then) and time I couldn't. All very well done. Keep up the good work. I will try and add some discographies to those articles when I get the time. And thank you for leaving a comment on my talk page couple of months ago. I do not sign in much often anymore. Cheers! ~ Elitropia (talk) 21:35, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Elitropia thank you for the praise. I personally enjoyed your articles, especially the July page, that group is one of my favorite psychedelic bands. I think people are starting to see the importance of 60s garage in the digital age, which is leading to more online sources. Honestly, when I first started creating articles, I looked at your pages among others to learn the correct style and way of organizing. If you have time, you should message Garagepunk66 as well because he enjoys talking about 60s music as much as me.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 22:50, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

DYK for L.A. Woman

On 17 August 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article L.A. Woman, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Jim Morrison recorded some vocals for the Doors' L.A. Woman in the bathroom doorway? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/L.A. Woman. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, L.A. Woman), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:06, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

The Monks article is now GA

I have just listed the Monks article as GA. I want to commend you for the excellent work on the article! A bot will be inserting the little green pellet at the top corner of the article within the next few days. Garagepunk66 (talk) 01:48, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Monks

The article The Monks you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Monks for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Garagepunk66 -- Garagepunk66 (talk) 02:01, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Message for Garagepunk66

I hope you can read this Garagepunk66. From what I can tell, you are upset about what you heard. I want you to know I am innocent and the Checkusers simply ignored the very serious issues I brought forth. I do not care about the block anymore; I just do not want to lose a friend simply because three Checkusers refused to take me seriously after having a near perfect track record of staying out of trouble. If you doubt me, know that just an hour ago CrazyAces489 (again) sent me a hideous e-mail directed toward me, which boasted about how he fooled everyone and put me in my place. If you want on-wiki evidence, look at his other sockpuppets that were meant to attack you and me (User:ALongSleep I found is just ALongStay 2.0 that was caught sooner). CrazyAces says he has every intention to do this again so my time here is limited if the same steps are taken by "experienced" Checkusers. I am in the process of accumulating months of technical evidence so this time I cannot be cyber-stalked and I will not have this troubling issue hang over my head anymore. If you do not want to talk to me, I understand but I am forever going to maintain my innocence on this issue. Be back in a week and hopefully we can get back to what we were doing in the first place uninterrupted.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 15:09, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

You don't need to worry--my inclination is to presume your innocence. I am not here to judge people, just to write. Whatever I had to endure with LongStay is minor compared to what you have had to endure at the hands of CrazyAces--and, the whole situation about LongStay may not yet be known. I think it is important to know that, when you return, you will have the welcome and support of most people here, including myself. Garagepunk66 (talk) 17:10, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

That is nice to know Garagepunk66, now this week can go by with ease. I had Ritchie333, Bishonen, PRehse, Softlavender, Ghmyrtle, and Martenivan all agree that the situation does not seem right, but apparently that meant nothing. Even when CA mocked the CheckUser Mike V through my appeal, he seemed oblivious to the fact more was going on (or could not admit he made a mistake). I was simply dismissed even when I revealed the very real case of CA tracking my mobile device, which pokes large holes in accusing me of sockpuppetry. It was all "technical date" to him, but it was not paired with any common sense or humanity. ALongStay was/is another version of CrazyAces; I can safely say that now with the recent e-mails he has sent me in "celebration". Be careful in my absense, CA may take advantage of the situation because I know for a fact he traces our conversations based on his recent edits on sockpuppet accounts confirmed to his name. I may try to move my sandbox (which is inaccessible) projects to my Userpage so I can get some work done. You would think since blocks are not supposed to be punitive and I proclaimed that I only want to write, that I would be unblocked, but I guess Mike V does not want to right an obvious wrong. Anyways, take care and I hope this will be the last you hear of this bother.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 17:47, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

You'll be fine. Eventually you'll look back on the block as noting more than a bump in the road. You'll carry on, and things will get better. Garagepunk66 (talk) 22:51, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Garagepunk66 just as I feared look at the Black Beauty (album) being nominated for deletion. Bishonen another sockpuppet of CrazyAces. Mike V really messed this one up big time sorry to say.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 02:24, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Mike V just curious how long are you going to let this go on? During the time of my block, three sockpuppets of CrazyAces489 have been found: one to troll you for your mistake (User:Drinkandtype), one to try and delete an article I wrote (User:Truestorydaddy), and most recently one to troll me (User:GOS2). Granted, CrazyAces sockpuppets were around prior to my block, but they were never this bold because CA is actually a coward when everything is on equal ground. So far, the block has only caused damage to the encyclopedia, and I am hoping you want to avoid that.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 15:26, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Vanjagenije here is another CrazyAces sock, User:GOS2. Sorry about that, but there is going to be a lot of trolling, malice, and disruption by him in the coming week thanks to recent events that could have been avoided. Thankfully, I still have access to my talk page so Garagepunk66 can help me out, and nothing can get too far out of hand.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 15:58, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

The block has already been reviewed by another checkuser, who has agreed with my findings. I am very certain this is not a mistake. From the information available to me, you have already made an appeal to the arbitration committee. If they haven't responded to you already by email, I would envision that they will get back to you shortly. Mike V • Talk 16:26, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Well it is a mistake and you are still getting mocked for it by CrazyAces. At this point it has just become embarrassing for you Mike V. CrazyAces's disruption can be handled if you simply undue your careless decision. What is there to gain from the block? Can you answer me that? All it has caused is a delay in me improving music-based articles and an escalation in CrazyAces activity. Do you consider that a job well done?TheGracefulSlick (talk) 16:47, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Bishonen Ritchie333 (anyone really) can you please talk some sense into Mike V. Even if I did deserve this block (which I did not), what has been accomplished by it? All Mike V has done is encourage CrazyAces and prevent me from working positively on articles. This mistake has gone too far and it will only get worse the longer I am blocked. Unless you guys enjoy doing this, I suggest Mike V makes the right decision finally.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 17:03, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

I think Mike V should unblock you, leave the other accounts having matching checkuser details indeffed, and hard block the IPs CrazyAces is using. Mike has had several threads recently with people complaining his blocks are over-punitive and prevent content being written. Ritchie333 17:19, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

• DeltaQuad since you are here to cool the heat from Mike V's mistake may I ask: what is a legitimate reason I am still under a block when I made a commitment to continue meaningful writing like I had always been doing? No one has answered that for me yet. If I have the absolute intention to make a positive expansion to the encyclopedia like several users who comment here also believe, where is the point other than to be punitive? Ritchie333 even says Mike is being over-punitive. The block has caused nothing but trouble for admins who had to clean up the trolls mocking Mike more than me. He damaged the encyclopedia more than helping to enhance it. Do you want a confession and a commitment to never do it again? Will that make everyone feel like they did a good thing? Because at this point I will confess to almost anything if it means I can get back to work without Checkusers trying to justify a careless mistake.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 00:36, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

• If you want to erase my contributions from your talkpage to evade the scrutiny I present, then no, I will not participate to help you out or answer your questions. I have more important things to handle than waste my time for it to be erased. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 00:41, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

DeltaQuad I knew it; you cannot answer my question because you have no legitimate reason. One CheckUser makes a blunder and so the rest need to do anything they can to justify it. You obviously do not care about enhancing the encyclopedia as long as your power to block here seems like it had a meaningful purpose. Each article and every edit I make in the future will be a testament to how incompetent Mike V is with his judgement (and apparently yours as well). This is a punitive block pure and simple. You feel it justified to keep a block on a solid content-creator simply to illustrate a point of how "big and bad" you are. I apologize I hurt your feelings apparently because I removed a comment from my own talk page. I am not hiding from scrutiny, feel free to put your message back because editors who work with me know the truth.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 01:01, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

• My feelings aren't hurt. I've had a lot worse done to me. I just don't wish to waste my time. The reason your still blocked is because you can't be honest, accountable, and can't abide by the rules. That, and you continue to fire off personal attacks and casting aspersions. And honestly, I don't need an admission to do my job. You need an admission of guilt (that is legitimate, and not half assed) apologizing to the community for breaking their trust. You are not the first content heavy editor to be blocked for sockpuppetry (some of which have turned into longtime sockmasters) and you won't be the last. It's your talkpage, you have the right to remove my statements, and i'm not going to interfere with that, but you never really provided a reason to remove it either...except maybe that you claim it's lies. If you want to have a productive conversation with me, I'm willing, but with your behavior so far, there is no way it can be productive. If you want a productive conversation, we can start by responding to the concerns I laid out in the edit you removed. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 01:21, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

DeltaQuad I am sorry but I will not bow to that. I will however apologize to the admins who had to clean up the sockpuppets that directly resulted from the block. I apologize to the editors I work with because I cannot help them effectively at the moment. I apologize that the checkusers cannot trust me to not sockpuppet when the ALongStay account appears to have been out of commission for over a month. I also emphasize my commitment to staying within guidelines for as long as I continue to write here. From what I can tell, I can happily say several users still trust me and I am thankful for that. I have no intention to become some sockmaster, I just want to write about music and other interests. But I have said all those things to three other Checkusers and was promptly ignored. I thank you because you have been the only one to at least partially respond to my statements. If you have anything you want to add that is fine, but I do not know what else I can offer.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 01:49, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

TheGracefulSlick, I know it's a bitter shock to be blocked, and perhaps I shouldn't hold you altogether accountable for the way you behave under a block. But even so, I'm myself shocked at the way you're acting. You erased Amanda's uncomfortable comment with the non-responsive edit summary "Nice. And yes you're wrong too"; I can seriously only suppose you did that because you have no answer to give her, and perhaps because you don't want your friends to see the facts (yes, facts) she presented laid out on this page. You have attacked any CheckUser who has commented, and now you even create a theory that all the CheckUsers are in cahoots, doing everything they can to justify a doubtful block by one of their colleagues, merely to show how "big and bad" they are. That is not at all my experience of what other CUs do when one of them has done something dubious, and I have some experience of CheckUsers. I've never seen any blue code of silence amongst them. You try to defend yourself by impugning the integrity of all CheckUsers, most unfairly, and I'm very sorry to see you acting in such a way. Please consider taking a break from arguing on this page until the block expires. Bishonen | talk 10:27, 3 October 2016 (UTC).

Bishonen noted but I'm not changing my stance. I have had four Checkusers attempt to justify Mike V's actions, while ignoring all the damage he caused. They know very well that I would never change my view on this situation; yet, all they have done so far is attempt to drive home their point. The best CheckUser so far is DeltaQuad because at least she bothered to outline a way I could be unblocked sooner. However, it still remains apparent there is no actual reason to keep me blocked. One cannot say there is a reason to believe I will sockpuppet again (if there ever was a first time) because the ALongStay account has been out of commission for over a month and there are no other accounts the Checkusers can try to connect me to. I have said multiple times that I simply want to write, and, based on my track record, that is a positive thing. As I have also stated, I am willing to confess to just about anything at this point if it means I can get back to editing without Checkusers delaying it any longer.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 14:14, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

• Oh and Bishonen or Mike V anyone want to block the User:StrongJudo sockpuppet by CrazyAces?TheGracefulSlick (talk) 21:38, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Full protection

Due to the proliferation of socks on this page, I've full-protected your talk page for three days. Sorry about that, I know it means you can't communicate as well. Ritchie333 17:53, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

• And also TGS's non-admin friends can't post support here, which is very unfortunate, especially since he doesn't have e-mail enabled. That said, I was just considering full protection myself, and three days sounds about right. If somebody has something important to tell TGS, feel free to post it on my page and I'll pass it on after vetting. Bishonen | talk 18:03, 2 October 2016 (UTC).
• Switched to ECP in the hopes that that works. Opabinia regalis (talk) 18:50, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

• It seems to, as they've now moved their efforts to the userpage. I've ECP'd that as well. A useful access level, Opabinia regalis — good thinking! Actually 3 days of it seems measly, it doesn't even cover TGS's block. I'll extend it to a couple of weeks, if nobody minds. TGS can say how he likes it. Bishonen | talk 21:37, 2 October 2016 (UTC).

Bishonen the level of protection on the pages works for me; I just want to get back to writing. Apologies for all the unnecessary work caused by this even more unnecessary block.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 21:57, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Back to GP66

Garagepunk66 I am in the process of building a list of proposed articles I had hoped to write. One in particular l wanted to pass to you right away is The Family Dog, a concert poster company that was formed in San Francisco by Chet Helms. You probably have seen dozens of their psychedelic poster designs. Anyways, if the onslaught of vandals emboldened by Mike V's carelessness continues, I will drop out of editing for an undisclosed amount of time. It just is not fun anymore when a simple situation is drastically escalated by one admin, and the sock puppets that are mocking him more than me at this point. It is a shame because a simple unblock would lighten the pressure (Ritchie333 agrees with me), especially since there is no actual reason to have the block (if there still is one real reason that benefits wikipedia Mike V please enlighten me). Well before I go too far off topic, I wanted to tell you that I intend to reveal the whole list to you before my possible retirement. I will leave it up to you to finish what I hoped we would complete together if what I mentioned remains unchanged.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 21:57, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

You don't need to worry and you don't need to retire. This week I'll keep an eye on your articles to guard against deletionists. They might let you ping me here, due to the exceptional circumstances, then I'll go to the Village pump, so no one accuses you of canvassing. I'll try to keep watch of CA's various account's tracks, but, as we all know, he operates under so many aliases (he starts up a new user account every day), that it will be a challenge. I'll also keep an eye on the Afd page, but that thing is so long--trying to find things there is like a needle in a haystack--I could yellow key-word your user name at Afd every day, but right now you can't leave a message there, so it will be hard for me to find the entry. But, I'll keep an eye. Garagepunk66 (talk) 00:40, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Incidentally, an editor is required to contact you on your talk page when he nominates an article for Afd. If the article gets deleted, you can have it automatically re-instated by an admin. and the discussion on its Afd discussion entry will go right back to square one--you just ping the editors who were previously part of the discussion. Usually it takes at least a week for an article to get deleted anyway, so there is a certain lag of time. Garagepunk66 (talk) 00:50, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Garagepunk66 you do not need to change your routine for me or else the Checkusers and vandals win. Keep moving forward and I will make my decision soon. At the moment I just want to return to normalcy. If anything, I have learned Checkusers are incredibly incompetent and that is scary when you consider what power they have here. I hope we can still use this talk page temporarily for discussion until the block is lifted. I wanted to point out awhile ago I appreciate you creating the Kitchen Cinq article. I never heard them before and I usually know just about every Texas garage band of note. Coincidently, a lot of my recent articles are about Texan bands because sources seem to favor that region more than many others.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 01:10, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

I'll keep an eye on things--it will not be an imposition--and it will keep the deletionists in check, to boot. I've heard you say on a couple of occasions that the Texas bands are your favorites. Garagepunk66 (talk) 02:01, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Garagepunk66 I saw that idiotic edit that anonymous IP placed on your user page. Just in case you did not notice, he/she also wrote a message here: User talk:Garchy, asking how to open a SPI case. Whether they follow through remains to be seen, but to avoid unwarranted headaches I would just tell Garchy to ignore the question. Also, if the IP (who I presume is CrazyAces, I mean let's get real) follows through with the case on another account or address call on a trusted admin to end the trolling. I obviously cannot defend myself at the moment, but that does not mean you can't. It may be a good idea to check your articles if you have them watchlisted. Last time a sockpuppet targeted you, they nominated The Humans (New York band) for Afd without notifying you; however, thankfully, it was stopped short in that case. I will be back soon and I guarentee the troll will be much less bold in his efforts when I am free to edit anywhere, so hang in there.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 00:59, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

I've been really busy at my job lately, so I didn't keep an eye on the Humans thing like I should have--normally I'd have been more vigilant. And, yeah, I saw that little vandal's unwelcome"addition" to my user page, but I'm not going to worry about it--that would be like getting rowled up over a fly or mosquito. The admins. can spray some Raid on that little problem (they sure must be working overtime right now zapping out hundreds of bugs like CA!) Garagepunk66 (talk) 23:11, 5 October 2016 (UTC)