Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Marskell (talk | contribs) at 18:44, 7 October 2006 (→[]: thx). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Mayhem

Here's me again. I think those three new sections are unnecessary. Wolf's Lair Abyss (1995-1999), Grand Declaration of War (2000-2003) and Chimera (2004-present). The article is too fragmented and everything in one piece was quite sufficient. It is the band biography section and not album release info. I'm not sure about this but it looked better before especialy because nothing significant happend in 95 to 99 when Wolf's Lair Abyss was released. Feel free to contact me and say what you think! Death2 23:08, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

It's not a problem i changed the opening line thing. You removed Mayhem is, and replaced with seminal. I reinserted Mayhem is a seminal Norwegian black metal... Just take a look at the very first line of the article. See you. Death2 00:03, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok, thank you for messing up the Mayhem article. By the way learn how to spell correctly or buy a dictionary. I'll leave you with your little playground now. Death2 20:49, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Hint's and tips

You could re-insert Image:Mayhem current lineup.jpg to Mayhem's page and place Deathcrush pic somewhere down the article (maybe in the discography section where it was, it looks nice there). Death2 16:39, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry but the article seems a bit over-done :) You can start by removing a couple of pics (Euronymous with the sword???, way too many portraying two members which are now gone for a long time) and sweep the text through a spelling checker (MS word or something). As you may noticed I'm not doing to much edits lately too much better things in life to do than waste time on this usseles and non-essential project... Death2 21:10, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Pierre S Rosen

Hi, you listed Pierre S Rosen for deletion and followed the steps correctly except that you posted the reasons why the article should be deleted on the Talk page of Pierre S Rosen rather than the AfD log. I completed the AfD and it can be found here. I think you are right to list this article for deletion, thanks for helping to clean up Misplaced Pages. MLA 08:07, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Bryansmyth.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Bryansmyth.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Misplaced Pages's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

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

• Misplaced Pages:Image use policy
• Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 19:06, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

AfD

No, I can combine those into two, I'll let you know when I'm done (in about 5 minutes). -- Northenglish (talk) -- 22:13, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

On second thought, I've decided it's best not to do it after the fact. However, for future reference, read How to list multiple related pages for deletion. And of course, remember to vote in the AfD debate that I put up. ;-) -- Northenglish (talk) -- 22:18, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Brian Boru

Thanks, for your note :) Its always nice to hear work is appreciated :) - FrancisTyers · 23:03, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh the shame...

How can you show your face in public? - brenneman 00:35, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

mayhem

I don't see really any problem with it except in some individual cases, viz. Varg and Blackthorn; the later since it is linked to a band. Spearhead 08:27, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Lists

This is regarding your comment in your revision to this page, "Should this be a category rather than list." Lists and categories are not interchangeable; lists have several advantages, so I see no reason why the list entry shouldn't stay. It still needs a fair amount of work though. I think the biggest problem right now is, it's really not a list (as I mentioned on the talk page).

I've left messages to Durrus several times asking him to get more familiar with the style guide, stop using sentence fragments, stop inserting empty headers, etc., but he still seems to be making a mess everywhere he goes. Seems to have lots of good information, but it looks like a team of editors need to follow him around and clean up. Dsreyn 04:13, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I take the points being made and perhaps the more substantial entries here should have their own page, trying to incorporate the editorial comments. Durrus 19:33, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

The map for Durrus is in the wrong place the red blob shows Bantry Durrus 19:09, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I made a first cut at converting this article to more of a true list format, but it definitely needs more work. The section called "Early period" seems out of place; I don't want to just delete it, since there's good information, but perhaps it might be the start of a separate article on the history of Irish music collecting. Dsreyn 14:34, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

feel free to create a new category on hisstory of irish music collecting, there is a lot of info. out thereDurrus 14:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Ingres

Curious as to the reason for your edit of the opening paragraph on Ingres--my rationale being that the opening is otherwise bland, and does little to explain his significance. The statements regarding his place as a neoclassicist and draftsman are, I believe, accepted currency in art readings. JNW 00:17, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

I removed the phrases 'greatest', 'idiosyncratic', 'unrivalled' & 'in the full possession of his mature power' per WP:APT - to describe Ingres as 'the greatest exponent of the Neoclassical style (sic)', citations are needed, although personally I believe that statement to be true. But I take you're point about leaving the lead bland, I'll expand it out a bit. Good work on the Balthus article BTY ;) Coil00

Thank you for the explanation; I agree that I was heavy on the adjectives. Just trying to enliven a long and rather dry entry. Best wishes,

JNW 01:44, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Nick Drake, Duncan Sheik

You continuously remove the info about the ties between Duncan Sheik and Nick Drake, but honestly, it benefits the page to have that reference for people of this generation who follow Duncan Sheik to further explore one of his influences and get to know the music of Nick Drake as well. By doing so, you are sending Nick Drake into obscurity to this and future generations. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.129.82.143 (talk • contribs) 07:52, 19 September 2006.

Then it more properly belongs on Sheik's page, not Drake's. As for 'sending Nick Drake into obscurity'; you are joking I take it. Coil00 12:54, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

sex Pistols

Thats OK I wasn't particularly married to that edit :) , I just think the term HIT single sounds a bit naff, particularly as some of the songs reached about # 33 in the charts which doesn't seem very 'hit' to me... I'd be pleased to help save the article from down grading, I'll fill in some citation blanks where I can, unfortunately alot of the stuff is stuff I just know, having been steeped in UK punk history since the 70s by living through it, rather than being able to put my finger on definitive references. Loats of it is in "No Dogs" and "Englands Dreaming" though, maybe a good excuse to re-read them... quercus robur 00:45, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Sex Pistols

Kudos on your work on this one. I've been going through section by section on the copy only, because I'm not particularly familiar with sources. With you adding sources, it's slowly getting to (current) FA standard. Per talk and the FAR, I think the comments on what previous "challenges to the system" consisted of, should be ditched. We either source "satire boom" and "trade unions," or we don't. Marskell 00:15, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I had sort of guessed a quote from the Queen herself ("we shall not have it!") probably didn't (verifiably) occur. I actually agree about over-contextualization—thus the dropped bit about previous challenges to the system. It seems obvious, but it's actually a subtle form of OR. Anyhow, the article is quite close to where it should be. Marskell 22:59, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I left one note at the talk on the Never Mind the Bollocks section. If that can be handled, I think we're good. I hate having articles 95% done kicking around at FAR for days. Marskell 13:22, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Thx. I just need to apply my standards to my own grammatically brutal posts on Wiki talk. Marskell 18:44, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Antony Hegarty.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Antony Hegarty.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Misplaced Pages and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is 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.

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. feydey 15:03, 6 October 2006 (UTC)