User talk:Bobyllib/Archive3

Year of birth missing instead of Date of birth missing

Hi. Concerning this edit I would like to inform you that for for article pages we use Category:Year of birth missing (living people) instead of Category:Date of birth missing (living people). Please read instructions in both categories and WP:BLP for more information. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 16:29, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

ok, i'll do that in future. thanks for letting me know. -- Bobyllib (talk) 17:24, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of George Kenyon, 2nd Baron Kenyon

A tag has been placed on George Kenyon, 2nd Baron Kenyon requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the article or have a copy emailed to you. billinghurst (talk) 05:59, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Louise Glover

Please how can a person even with links to paper articals be completly removed from this site. Louise glover wants to be removed taken off deleted from this website. how can we make this happen for her. Regards, Lidia, her agent and model manager. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lidia smith (talk • contribs) 00:46, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Only Love Can Break Your Heart

Sorry, but the article is about the Neil Young single/song. To have half or more of the article dedicated to a cover version of it is giving that version an enormous amount of undue weight. They deserve a mention, sure, but they are just another band who covered it. BTW, that St Etienne template in there, that's really unfitting in this article. If you want to add a line or two to their entry in the list of covers, that's fine, but there should not be more than that. If you want to have an article on the single as it was released by them and became a hit, make that into a separate article--it probably deserves it, but not in here. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:12, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

• I did it for you, see Only Love Can Break Your Heart (Saint Etienne single). And I was mistaken: that part of the article probably took up more than 80%. Maybe you can go and clean up the Saint Etienne article--I don't know if you removed the content from there or not, and links will have to be made. Drmies (talk) 15:17, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Cool. Cheers. It might well get merged though (although not by me), as that tends to be Wikipedia's policy (or at least tendency; there's not actually anything about different versions of the same song listed in WP:MUSTARD). A compromise would be to have maybe the section headed "St Etienne version" included in the article, and possibly a picture of the cover, but not the infobox, tracklisting or template. I don't know. I don't really care that much, so I'll leave it alone. :) -- Bobyllib (talk) 15:31, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
    • Well, the article on the Neil Young song needs a rewrite anyway, and I'll get to it at some point, since I do care for that one. (It's a great song.) I would think that since the focus often is on the "single" aspect that a merge is not likely, and since there's so many articles on songs and singles, I don't think anyone cares enough to make it likely to start doing that sort of work. Take it easy, Drmies (talk) 16:21, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
      • It is indeed a great song. -- Bobyllib (talk) 16:57, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

1991!

Yep, the extended version of Gold was in 1991. I should have known that! Oh, well, glad to get that sorted out. Regards, ProhibitOnions ^(T) 20:44, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikiproject Merseyside alphabetical ordering

To be honest I wasn't sure. The only reason I moved it was because based upon this, the article in question is placed unded M rather than B. It just seemed logical that the list on the project page should follow this --Daviessimo (talk) 23:12, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Wendy James

Your link to ALL MUSIC GUIDE was done because if you go to the link you PROVIDED it claims Wendy James was a MEMBER of Blondie..!!

It also lists the PRODUCER of her Costello album as CHRIS THOMAS (The Sex Pistols' Producer) when in fact it was CHRIS KIMSEY a small but significant difference..

You think.

It is therefore FACTUALLY incorrect on this and other aspects.

I will now of course REGISTER this fact with Wikipedia.

I will also request they stop YOUR CENSORSHIP.

If you would care to glance at the "history" of this entry you will see you are just the LATEST in a long line of people who CENSORED this page.

They were warned and officially repremanded by Wikipedia.

They learnt their lesson publically.

(Thinking they were above the FIVE PILLARS of Wikipedia and learning they certainly were not..)

So will you.

CENSORSHIP of this WENDY JAMES wikipedia entry will NEVER be allowed to pass un-noticed or un-reported.

Not then.

Not now.

If needs be I will provide DIRECT LINKS and VERIFIABLE content which cannot be removed for P.R. reasons.

(I assume you are the same "BOBBY" who joined the very poorly attended racine forum last year which went NOWHERE fast..?)

DO NOT ATTEMPT CENSORSHIP AGAIN.

This is not YOUR Wikipedia Website no more than it is mine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.164.177 (talk) 22:09, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

• Sorry if you think I'm censoring you. If you look at the edit history, you'll notice that it wasn't me that deleted all of your quite possibly true but unsourced statements about Wendy. I think that if there are verifiable sources for your additions you should (and must, if you want your additions to stay) cite them. I've got no PR agenda whatsoever, and have never intentionally listened to Racine (who, as you may have noticed, no longer have a wikipedia article) or joined a forum discussing them. -- Bobyllib (talk) 22:46, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Heh. Blocked and reverted. BJ^Talk 23:51, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
    • Don't think blocking will do much good as he/she appears to have a dynamic IP. Semiprotecting Wendy's article would appear to be a good move though. -- Bobyllib (talk) 17:43, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
• By the way, I've dropped AMG a line about the errors you mention (hadn't noticed them until you pointed them out), and I'm sure they'll amend them when they have time. Well, I hope so anyway. -- Bobyllib (talk) 17:43, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Wendy James again

BOBYLLIB...

Here are the two VERIFIED links which PROVE Wendy James was signed to One Little Indian in the 1990s which she tried to "forget" and you tried to (unwittingly?) help her do...

The actual NEWSPAPER CLIPPING mentioning the album coming out in 1997..

http://drybaby1.blogspot.com/2007/07/lies-in-chinatown-in-daily-telegraph.html

and here is the ACTUAL LETTER from One Little Indian's Managing Director confirming she was signed (first time anyway!) to them...

http://drybaby1.blogspot.com/2007/10/independence-is-philosophywell-it-used.html

There are PLENTY of screenshots,scans of documents and audio and video material on THIS site to CONFIRM every claim I have made on her Wiki..

For instance her BLATANT LIES that she and her band had just done TWO TOURS of the US on an Australian Blog in 2008..

http://smutbreast.blogspot.com/2008/09/its-taken-time-because-weve-done-five.html

and SCREENSHOTS of her long closed down OFFICIAL MESSAGE BOARD which she now refuses to admit ever existed..

http://drybaby1.blogspot.com/2008/12/funny-thing-happened-on-way-to-forum.html

And when her site WAS NOT even run by her by a New York P.R company instead..

http://drybaby1.blogspot.com/2008/05/year-racine-wasnt-really-wendy-james.html

And finally how much RACINE are a real band (not "concept" etc) and Wendy's plans for the future with them..As a genuine band.

http://smutbreast.blogspot.com/2009/02/punk-liar.html

PLEASE CHECK YOUR FACTS BEFORE YOU EDIT ANY FUTURE WENDY JAMES WIKI's...

When the truth comes out (with clear proof) you just end up looking foolish and gullible for posting the "Official" versions of events..

I have of course also sent SUCH LINKS to the powers that be here at Wikipedia..

Just in case you later claim you didn't read (or go to) the links mentioned..

For whatever reason best known to yourself..

(I know you were only acting on your VERY limited knowledge of the REAL situations and no doubt Wendy's cynical "whispers" in your ear..)

THEY HOWEVER WILL SEE THEM.

Verified and Sourced enough for you..?

Want many,many,many,many more..?

All 100% verified and sourced.

And that doesn't include the many videos and audio where Wendy speaks the words I have quoted in my contributions..

They can be played anytime of the day or night.

VIEWED BY ANYONE WORLDWIDE FOR FURTHER PROOF..

View them yourself and then perhaps alter your "version" of events..?

I do not make claims lightly and without evidence to back them up.

Never Have..

Never Will..

Can you say the same on this subject..?

86.42.135.61 (talk) 19:37, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

• Your idea of how to cite a source seems somewhat differs from Wikipedia's. If we were referencing the Punk Globe interview the Wikipedia way of sourcing it would be something like "Luvero, Max. "Interview with Racine". Punk Globe. Retrieved 2009-07-29.". Whilst your blog is interesting, screenshots don't cut it on Wikipedia. Also, when writing on a talk page (at least, when not replying to something that's already there), it's best to click "new section" instead of "edit". -- Bobyllib (talk) 22:41, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

The Audience

It doesn't really matter how a band decided to format their name. What matters is to use a style that resembles standard English. Adding a space and capitalisation does this, but does not alter the way the name is pronounced. Nouse4aname (talk) 14:05, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

WikiBirthday

I saw from here that it's been exactly four years since you joined the project. Happy WikiBirthday! Keep up the good work, rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 04:03, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

• Oh wow, thanks :D -- Bobyllib (talk) 10:57, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

I Came Here To Blow Minds

As of August 14th 2009 the "announced" album "I Came Here To Blow Minds" by Wendy James has STILL NOT been actually ANNOUNCED anywhere..

Months after it's "announcement" was put on Wikipedia...?

Nor has it received any (even vague) RELEASE DATE..

Wendy James will NOT be allowed to use this or any other Wiki entry for FREE PUBLICITY.

She and those attempting to give her that free publicity will be called on it regularly.

Very Publically.

86.42.181.101 (talk) 17:46, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

• That's very interesting. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. -- Bobyllib (talk) 19:49, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Jaymie Ireland

The article Jaymie Ireland has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not independently notable: at best, merge to Ooberman

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Rodhullandemu 00:07, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

• Good one. I agree and have merged it. -- Bobyllib (talk) 00:36, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Tiger Moth

You got the change before i could contact you. Please look at WP:MOSDAB re disambiguation pages and reconsider your revert as the current situation is an anomally. The intent is to phase out (disambiguation) suffixes. Apart from that even if most searches seek the aircraft there are still article choices and it gets everybody to their destination in one step. The minoryt searches probably need more help anyway. Ex nihil 01:19, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

• Fair enough. Thanks for letting me know -- Bobyllib (talk) 10:24, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Rollback (VANDAL)

Can you please stop clicking this when reverting your own edits? Engage brain before using mouse! -- Bobyllib (talk) 00:11, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Please refer to WP:CIVIL before attacking yourself on Wikipedia. Further personal attacks on User:Bobyllib, may result in User:Bobyllib being blocked from editing :) Little Professor (talk) 11:16, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I've contacted this user off-wiki and I feel we have satisfactorily resolved our differences... -- Bobyllib (talk) 19:10, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Would you be interested in joining a WikiProject devoted to Lancashire?

Hi, I have noticed that you are from Lancashire and I was wondering if you have heard of the new WikiProject group of WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria. If you are interested in joining please feel free to become a paricipant and help us achive our goals. If you do join I am looking forward to your contributions. 93gregsonl2 (talk) 21:01, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't know why I didn't notice this sooner. Joined! -- Bobyllib (talk) 20:38, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Re: The Long Blondes

Yes, there is other works which include the quotes in the WP title. I.e "Heroes". So "Couples" and "Singles" should have them because they're very important to the meaning of the title. Thanks. Saveourcity (talk) 15:28, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I've just noticed that's not what you were saying. You weren't saying the quotes shouldn't be there, but should be without the suffix. Sorry, forget it. Saveourcity (talk) 15:33, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

The quotes should be there and, with them there, you have a unique title which needs no clarification. That is what I was saying. -- Bobyllib (talk) 21:34, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

WHERE HAS THAT "NEW" WENDY JAMES ALBUM GOT TO..?

well Bobyllib,

You were WARNED you were posting nothing more than Wendy James' made up promises on that Wiki entry weren't you..?

Time and time again..

Almost from the first moment you posted (May June 2009)...

And WHEN (not if) these "promises" failed to materialise that entry would look pretty stupid and gullible...

This is NOVEMBER 2009..

You chose to IGNORE that warning mainly because you "believe" in what she says..

(no factual or hard evidence was ever produced for her claim but that's okay as her WORD is good enough for you isn't..?)

Let me spell it out for you..

SHE...HAS...NO...RECORD...OR...DISTRIBUTION...DEAL...IN...ANY...WAY...SHAPE...OR...FORM.

Nor had when she made her "album soon" promise..

Which apparently only YOU posted as gospel anywhere on the internet.

(and yep YOUR name attached to those entries will do your credibility a world of good here at Wikipedia won't it..?)

Notice she hasn't even named the "band" she (used to ) claim she will be touring with...

ANYWHERE..

(Not on My Space or her Facebook page..)

And as for her FACEBOOK page..

All she does now is cut'n'paste SLOGANS which are utterly meaningless..(and deliberately so)

(and censors anyone who asks questions like "where IS this album you promised ages ago Wendy?"...)

Wonder why..?

Oh the album will EVENTUALLY crawl out..

My (very educated) guess is Wendy will say (very soon)...

"I hope to have the album ready for release sometime in the Spring of 2010..fingers crossed..Keep supporting me!"

It's nice and VAGUE and of course can be "changed" yet again this time NEXT YEAR when it doesn't appear..

"I never promised the album would come out in Spring 2010...you must be mistaken.."

http://drybaby1.blogspot.com/2009/08/wendy-james-and-donatella-have-lot-more.html

(the "reviews" from May have been REMOVED from the link page...as they were PROVED to be fakes..)

http://drybaby1.blogspot.com/2009/06/w-is-for-wendy-and-f-is-for-fake.html

You were warned.

Posting on that Wikipedia entry has been nothing but a HUMILIATING HEADACHE for you,hasn't it..?

You have no idea how many times I have seen THIS scenario over the past 5 years..

http://drybaby1.blogspot.com/2009/06/have-you-not-got-any-new-photos-for.html

In fact I wouldn't be at all surprised if "Wendy" over at My Space and Facebook is NOT really Wendy at all..

http://drybaby1.blogspot.com/2008/05/year-racine-wasnt-really-wendy-james.html

It wouldn't be the first time...

That would explain the deadness of both sites..

And now you can count yourself as one of some P.R. agent's UNWITTING slave..

Nice feeling isn't it..?

You were warned.

Wendtrut (talk) 14:48, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

• Hello again. I think you've rather overstated my actions. Here I put in "James has announced plans to release a new solo album entitled I Came Here To Blow Minds on her MySpace blog", which is true (I'm sure you have screenshots), and here I added "No release date is forthcoming", which is also true. I hardly think that that counts as being a PR agent's slave, nor a threat to any Wikipedia credibility I may have had.

Do you know of any newspaper/magazine articles that mention Wendy's relationship with Mick Jones? -- Bobyllib (talk) 01:12, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

RIGHT ON CUE AND AS VAGUE,BLAND AND NON-COMMITAL AS IT COULD POSSIBLY BE...YEAH ANOTHER "WENDY JAMES" HEADACHE FOR YOU

As predicted by me WENDY JAMES has "issued" a typically (and deliberately) VAGUE and BLAND statement about her "new" album..

After her PUBLIC ROASTING here on Wikipedia last week..

"...ICHTBM DONE. AMAZING. FINISHED. LISTENING DOWN ON HEADPHONES NOW.... SUNDAY MORNING IN SYDNEY IN A WAREHOUSE OVERLOOKING THE CITY.... IT'S ALL SO GODDAMN GOOD..."

Why Sydney and not the New York she claims to love so much over and over again....when it suits her?

It is much cheaper (basically freebies from friends) and she can meet up with her "friend" for some chemical enhancement away from prying (U.S police and immigration) eyes...

http://drybaby.wordpress.com/2009/05/14/the-cocaine-and-the-ivy/

The cost of which of course will be "recouped" (she hopes) with downloads and sales of the album...if it is ever actually released.

Or a Tour if the economic recession improves next year...(much,much later next year b.t.w)

That is where (also) "free publicity" like Wiki entries come into play...and obliging editors prepared to act like unpaid P.R agents for her..

(Wikipedia SPECIFICALLY rules out direct links to COMMERCIAL download and online stores AND CUT AND PASTING "REVIEWS" to avoid this trickery so that won't be allowed..)

Of course as also predicted it tells the reader ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about distribution (there is none),release date (there is none either) and deliberately avoids (on purpose) committing to any details about a future TOUR (there is none ) which can later be thrown back at her when it doesn't happen..

The "statement" on "her" My Space page is also suspiciously unsigned..

(no doubt Miss James forgot her own name...in the excitement..or maybe the person who ACTUALLY wrote it did..oops!)

And Sydney,Australia is NOT Paris,France or New York...is it?

THAT will have to be "corrected" before folks notice too won't it..?

Expect stealth attempts to "revise" the wiki entry about it being recorded in Paris in the summer of 2009 later in the year to better "reflect" the actual TRUTH..

Along with attempts to (bogus) claim the album was NEVER going to be released this side of 2010 all along..

Even though it so clearly was...until it was refused by several companies due to Miss James' "problems"..and last minute "new arrangements" had to be made..

(HINT: that sort of behaviour will NOT be allowed to go UNEXPOSED without a public mention or 10 on the discussion page so don't even think about it..!)

I will also be making a FORMAL REQUEST to have the "temporary protection" removed from the wiki as it is clearly be used to KEEP OUT contributions rather than actually PROTECT from "vandalism"..

And that is a definite NO-NO according to the Wikipedia Rules..

This time I am sure the REQUEST will be granted (eventually) in light of the almost TOTAL drought of any "new" contributions from ordinary members of the public..

Plus the need for Wikipedia to keep the wiki "fresh" will always be the first priority for a WIKIPEDIA site which must compete with FACEBOOK and other networking sites..

Or risk becoming one of the HIGH PROFILE casualties of the change of decade next year..

(like My Space are seriously in danger of becoming thanks to their short sighted and now MUCH REGRETTED policies...)

And the fact that Wikipedia REGARDS a person's registration before making any contribution as enough VALIDITY will only add to the overwhelming argument.

I shouldn't even have to say that the recent "alterations" and comments in the history page from your good self will also HELP that argument..

Finally the DISCUSSION page of the wiki entry is not subject to the same stringent editorial rules...

More so now that the creators of WIKIPEDIA are actively seeking DISCUSSIONS (no matter how rowdy or "controversial") on the future policies of the site

They are clearly aware of the "challenges" ahead over the next few years and want to avoid going the way of DINOSAUR search engines and "communities" now long gone..

Some would argue that in many case the DISCUSSION sections of the wiki entries in now THE place where real descriptions of an artist can take place..

Notice the more "honest" discussion page of The Towers Of London (a true joke band in the worst sense of that word!) and the bland Article page which is (rightfully) ignored by all..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Towers_of_London

and of course the by now (widely known) classic Wiki entry of Matt Goss which is so BLAND and EDITED it actually contains NOTHING but a series of links to his COMMERCIAL SITES..

Which has NOT gone un-noticed by the PUBLIC on his "DISCUSSION" page..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Matt_Goss

Rather than the (increasingly ignored by the media) main ARTICLES which in some high profile case are nothing more than PRESS RELEASE LANGUAGE...(see two above!)

CENSORING public discussions which Wikipedia have actively REQUESTED can be nigh on impossible but often are INVALUABLE to shaping future policies here..

And of course the PUBLIC have only to click the "history" tab and "prev entry" button to see what was CENSORED in all it's red and yellow glory..

Which of course defeats the PURPOSE of censoring it in the first place ironically..!

THEY....CAN.....STILL....SEE...IT....IF....THEY....WANT.

(ironically Wikipedia did toy with the idea of removing the "History" page but were advised it would leave them open to a huge "Civil Liberties" US lawsuit if they did...(Billions of dollars!)

And of course when people CONTRIBUTE to a discussion page they do of course keep COPIES of what they wrote..

So it can be put back should it "disappear"...

(By now a standard method of behaviour for ANY contribution you make to ANY website/messageboard for 99% of the population...!)

And screenshot to post on the internet should it "disappear with extreme prejudice" which can (very rarely) happen too..

Ask Microsoft when they "disappeared" critical message about Windows Vista and then had to put them back to avoid being sued...

(Screenshots of the messages appearing ORIGINALLY were sent across the internet in seconds leading to huge pressure on them to PUT THEM BACK...which they did)

Only sensible.

I wonder will you be so quick to alter the Wendy Wiki YET AGAIN with the "new" bland safe vague statement this time..?

Wendtrut (talk) 01:18, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

• You should get a job at a newspaper. If all the stuff you posted in your blog was printed in what Wikipedia considers to be a reliable source, there'd be a lot more to work with for the article.
  I think you'll find that, as an established registered user, you can now edit Wendy's article. I'd advise you to familiarise yourself with WP:BLP before you do so though. -- Bobyllib (talk) 03:48, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Dave Parsons From Transvision Vamp and The Partisans...

Dave Parsons from Transvision Vamp has already said OFFICIALLY that he is not the "Dave Parsons" from The Partisans..

(this originated on several mistaken BUSH fan sites in the late 1990's and has stuck ever since thus the confusion..)

Dave Parsons from Transvision Vamp was born JULY 2nd 1966...

He would have been only about 11 in 1977/1978...and would have been very very young indeed to have been in a new wave band of that time don't you think..!)

Also a lot of the "bio" from both Dave Parsons and Tex Axile (Anthony Doughty) was in fact MADE UP by MCA Press Officer at the time Pete Basset..

Including the now widely disputed (and admitted as made up by Tex himself) story of the Wendy & Nick "finding" Dave & Tex graffitting a wall in West London and asking them if they wanted to be in a band..

(later on Wendy claimed in an interview that Jaz Piper (guitarist) was a waiter in a restaurant and she just asked him if he also wanted to join Transvision Vamp...even by Wendy's standards a ludicrous lie which was meant to explain two new band members for live shows...and ALSO ridiculed by Mr Piper himself before his personal site shut down in the late 1990s..)

Here is the one and only footage of Mr Piper talking..

http://drybaby1.blogspot.com/2008/09/me-and-my-big-vox.html

This interview of course was never mentioned at all anywhere by Wendy along with many,many others which have appeared over the years so trusting her "versions" of the Vamp story is never a good idea anyway..

The ACTUAL bass sounds on Pop Art for instance were provided by a well known session musician called Matthew Seligman..

The ACTUAL guitar sound was provided by another session musician genuinely called Kevin...!!

(you will find both names "semi hidden" on the sleeve of Pop Art & Velveteen if you look closely...see them there now?)

In the official Bush biography Dave Parsons even makes a joke about how Matthew Seligman should have been successful with Bush instead of him..

Of course considering the fact Wendy is now trying to ERASE all recent history anyway for her own cynical reasons...

"Racine?...what Racine?..I never heard of 'em..They didn't exist.."

http://drybaby1.blogspot.com/2009/12/recently-wendy-has-been-in-paris-ending.html

http://drybaby1.blogspot.com/2009/11/i-loved-racine-but-i-had-to-kill-it.html

(find links to these two interviews/features on any official Wendy site..you simply won't)

And the (semi-official) Transvision Vamp website (www.Transvisionvamp.com) officially closes down in 2010 too...(Feb I think..)

http://www.itm-ed.de/tvamp/

Soon the only history of Wendy's past (good or bad) will be the fantasy version she claims..

Unless you want to read how 21 year old international catwalk model Wendy James sold more records than Madonna,won 55 Grammies and is bigger than the Beatles in six months time..

So the Wikipedia Entry being kept up to date and correct is more important than ever..

Hope that clears up your query..

Bye.

Wendtrut (talk) 17:01, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

I have been told I can EDIT the Wendy James wiki entry but only if I had EDITED it 15 times before at least...!!!

The "Lock" was placed on the Wendy James Wiki for ESTABLISHED person only..

(I have been told this means a person who had PREVIOUSLY edited a wiki for at least a minimum of 15 times!!!...which of course NOBODY ever did with Wendy James..)

See the discussion section for that advice being given to me..

I have of course written to the powers to be to point out the simple fact that no one (except an EDITOR) would ever be able to alter ANY wiki entry that many times without arousing suspicion..

So it is pointless and a deliberate attempt to allow only "Select" people alter the entry..

NO MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC IS ABLE TO CONTRIBUTE ANYTHING AT ALL....

(even bizarrely Wendy James herself if she wanted to...which breaks many many Wiki pillars..!!!)

I have of course politely requested from "Brendan" (who imposed it) that the lock be removed too..

If that doesn't work then official channels it is..

Okay?

Wendtrut (talk) 17:11, 28 December 2009 (UTC)