User talk:Burningclean/Archive 6

Re: Welcome back

Hey, thanks for the kind words, it's good to finally have a few dedicated metal editors around here - the overall jump in quality for metal stuff has gone waaaay up in the past year. Im working on saving Nightwish from losing its FA status at the moment, (and it needs a complete overhaul -and I can honestly say I've never heard one of their albums!!) but after that I really do wanna get the base metal articles all up to snuff. Keep up the good work, I bet metal has more good and FA articles now than any other genre! \m/ Skeletor2112 (talk) 10:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

And I just left some comments on your AIC FAC page, I dont see how a lot of what people are whining about really matters to a FA. I also restructured your lead paragraph a bit - since the artlce says that Staley and Cantrell formed the band and recruited people, I took a few names off of the top(since they come up right at the beginning of History), also they are/were the main force/songwriters. I also made more of a mention of Staleys death in the lead, as that is a key point in the article. Its also good to mention a musical trait that made them stand out, so I added the harmony vocals of Layne and Jerry. Good work on the article, I'll see if I can clean up some minor things along the way to get this one featured, keep up the good work! Skeletor2112 (talk) 12:29, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem, I honestly don't see how those kinds of things are holding the article back... if this is sposed to be an encyclopedia, it should be fact based, and the AIC article looks fine there. I just did a little more work on the prose for AIC and added some "meat" to Facelift and Sap. Most of the rest of the article looks pretty good, though - I think it should go OK. As for Nightwish, I just picked up working onthat one because it was at FAR, and in the interest of METAL I hope to keep as much as we can there. But as I am working on it, I noticed it does need a *lot* of work... and it is a long ass article, rewording that stuff is taking a while. It's harder not being a fan (I at least own AIC stuff and really like their first few albums) and like I said I've never even heard NW ;) I do know they have fanatical fans, so hopefully someone will step up and fix anything I mess up. But yeah, in the future I dont mind working on prose, phrasing, wording, and sourcing (what I do best, IMO) for any metal or hard rock articles. Let me know if you need help or have any issues with what I added to AIC, and keep up the good work! \m/ Skeletor2112 (talk) 07:23, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey dude, theres nothing specific I am planning on right doing right now, but after AIC and NW(if I continue there) I will totally help you out with Opeth, I am a big fan(especially the older stuff, first 3 albums). I don't do too many reviews, other than lending support or opposing somthing - instead of telling someone a bunch of reasons why it doesnt work I like to help to make it work. ;) And I am probably using "prose" in the wrong context - but I mean like wording and sentence structure, making everything sound good - taking somthing like: "Bill went to the store. He bought a case of beer and walked home. Bill got hit by a car and his legs were crushed." and turning that into: "Following a trip to he store to buy beer, Bill was struck by a passing motorist while walking home, permanently losing the use of his legs." I have no idea what that is called, but trying to use formal tone like a textbook or somthing. Most FAC's I've seen having problems are struggling because they lack the formal tone. So thats what I do most, rewording and that kind of stuff. But yeah, I am down to help with Opeth if it needs work, after we get AIC to pass - and I think it will! \m/ Skeletor2112 (talk) 08:22, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey dude, I am working more on AIC and I just wanted to let you know I removed the quotes you added by Cantrell about the lyrics of Dirt - I think that may be what people were concerned with, using quotes reprinted on user webpages... it sucks to because that interview has some cool info on the lyrical stuff for Dirt - the drug concept and stuff. I do think that there could be some mention in the article of the lyrical "feel" of Dirt, that it is darker and stuff, but I cant really find a good way to put that in the article. It would probably fit good around the critical response part. Anyway, I will continue to wrok on it and see if I cant figure somthing out. Skeletor2112 (talk) 11:18, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I finished going through the AIC article, and I think it looks pretty good for FAC - take a look and let me know if you see any problems - I broke up the end section into Style and Legacy, so the section wasn't so cluttered. You might message any editors that opposed on the FAC page and ask them to take another look now, since all this work has been done. And I think in the interest of neutrality, I should probably take my vote off, since I worked on the article a bit. But I am sure it should have no problem passing at all - heres to another FA for metal! \m/ Skeletor2112 (talk) 12:36, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey dude, I found a great site for old archived AIC interviews, [1] - and I've found a bunch of cool stuff to add to the article. I took that other quote out because it just sounded a little weird in that place, and I couldnt figure out how to fit it in without sounding choppy, but I put in more quotes from that article, and a bunch of other ones. Looking at some of the other FA's, the article was a little sparse in places, so I am trying to add a few details, like studios, producers, and some other things on sound and feel and stuff. Anyway, if this thing ain't featured when I get done with it, there is somthing wrong with the world!! \m/ Skeletor2112 (talk) 11:57, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thats cool, I just put that Layne pic in there to break it up, and I wasnt sure if it would get removed, but it's good to have at least 1 or 2 other pics besides the infobox pic. That pic of Kinney near the end kinda looks disturbing though lol, he has a weird look on his face. I guess I am used to him from the old videos... All of the Wikicommons pics for AIC are not that great. I like the Cantrell one though, and it would be cool to somehow get a Staley pic in there, since he was such a big part of the band, and died and all. I cant log on to flickr either, my workplace blocks that site... but the article is looking damn good, if I say so myself. I am gona try and expand the musical style section that Wesley suggested, and I think we are all good after that. The hard part will be getting people to read it again - I have a feeling that some people just skim or dont even re-read it at all when it comes to re-evaluating an oppose vote. Plus I think a FAC page that has soooo much stuff(maybe my fault!) is a little intimidating for others to rate it.... might be a good idea to restart the nom since the article has been majorly worked on by us... but hell, maybe it passes tomorrow, who knows. \m/ Skeletor2112 (talk) 07:28, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

And just to let you know, I took out the logo pic. Indopug took offense to it(what a suprise he found somthing wrong!!) rather than try and argue it in there, I just took it out - I cant find a source on it. It made the article look better, too, but hell, what can you do? Skeletor2112 (talk) 08:57, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey dude, been away for a few days, but I just finished the rest of BritandBeyonce's notes on AIC. It's kinda strange that someone would spend all that time writing that stuff out, copying and pasting, ect - and not just fix the problems - but hey I guess different strokes for different folks. I would take that as a pretty thorough copy-edit, so I am not sure what more could come of the LoCE thing... Skeletor2112 (talk) 09:51, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Do not be surprised; thats how I work for now. We have no connection in our house so I'll just copy the article and review it. Its more productive. You can spot errors using Microsoft Word. Good luck.=) --BritandBeyonce (talk) 11:15, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey dude, I'm not sure if we should start the thing over - I think we are pretty close to getting it through. I'll ask SandyGeorgia what she thinks - I know she said its one of the longest ever running FAC's, and I am sure the FA people are all tired of looking at it. I will try and clean up some of the ending stuff a little, too - and hopefully indopug will support it too. Keep the faith! \m/ Skeletor2112 (talk) 06:17, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey man, Sandy just said here that if the cites are all agreed on, its good - I left a msg for indopug to check the sources - I think he was the only one to really question any cites... we are close! Skeletor2112 (talk) 21:58, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

To whom your refering to? Me or to Burningclean? --Efe (talk) 07:07, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I think you didnt know I was nominated before for adminship. It was a request that I should change BritandBeyonce to show maturity and you know, its fancrufty, for them. =) --Efe (talk) 07:09, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Of course, support. Ive posted a very long list of suggestions and everybody was ready to address. My reason I have to post it so that there will be objections, if any. YOu know, Im not a perfect reviewer. --Efe (talk) 07:17, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll post it now. but, I cant review their comments for now because I'll be gearing up for an article. Is it OK for you? --Efe (talk) 07:34, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Ahehe, forget it. I though you want me to go over and read their comments. =) Ive posted already in the FAC page. For now, Ill be bringing a lot of them to GA and hopefully, FA. By the way, thanks for the compliment. --Efe (talk) 07:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Congrats! Alice has this now. --Efe (talk) 02:51, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

When do you think the article be featured in the main page? --Efe (talk) 03:30, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

YOu mean you can ask them when to feature Alice? --Efe (talk) 03:35, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

OK. Thanks for the link. --Efe (talk) 05:15, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

WOO HOO!!! Man that was a long one, but I think it came out pretty damn awesome - congrats and good work, you took this thing from nothing all the way up! \m/ Skeletor2112 (talk) 05:21, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Skeeker

Skeeker right? --BritandBeyonce (talk) 11:29, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Arsames

Hey, me and User:Megastrike 14 have discovered a good death/thrash metal band from Iran called Arsames. He created the article, and I'm helping him expand it. If you could help us in any way possible, then that would be very much appreciated. If you need help finding info, then just use this website: [2] Thanks! Dark Executioner (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2008 (UTC)Dark Executioner

I have been searching the web, and I just cannot find any more information on Arsames that isn't already stated in its Wiki article. Will you look at the page and let me know if it meets Wikipedia's standards on at least not being nominated for deletion? This band seriously rocks and could be a potential big deal once they cut their first record.

Another thing: I created an article for their Cyclopia EP, but it was instantly deleted, without me having a chance to further edit the article. I believe that the page was deleted unjustfully, but once again, I would like your input. Dark Executioner (talk) 13:10, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

It supposedly "did not assert its significance." However, I am planning on recreating the article when more information surfaces about their upcoming debut album. I'm bummed that Arsames got deleted, but I really do appreciate your help and input. More on this later, Dark Executioner (talk) 18:17, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Opeth

Thanks. Best thing to do is wait for a week or so and just keep re-reading the article. Look at other music articles currently at FAC, read the FACs of articles that are featured, read some decent GA review, comments people leave are often helpful when relating to your own article. It helped when i worked on Metallica. M3tal H3ad (talk) 12:05, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Length is not a requirement it just needs to be comprehensive and not neglect the major facts. Anyhoo why the name change? M3tal H3ad (talk) 03:59, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Really good idea with the lists, should put it on the HMM page. M3tal H3ad (talk) 04:20, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Probably heavy metal and alt rock pages. I'd put it under "tasks". M3tal H3ad (talk) 04:25, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Still Reigning? ;) M3tal H3ad (talk) 04:29, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

You can warn someone that you will report them if they continue to be uncivil. M3tal H3ad (talk) 05:50, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to be an asshole, but the grammar you keep using in the Opeth article is very bad. I'll keep changing the particular section where the blatanlty obviuos grammatical errors are until you re-write it using proper english. (Metalstyle) 6 February 2008 —Preceding comment was added at 04:19, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Just please read the part in the very first article, about the member changes. There is a part

where it says, &quote "There are five members remain" which while using the english language it makes no sense, not even in the context of what you are trying to say. Also, information of that matter should be kept for the members section of the profile. Im not saying that its incorrect information, its just that it doesnt really belong there and it is also incorrect grammar. "There are five members remain" doesn't make sense in regards to the band specifically as well, seeing as they never have exceeded five members.

Also, Opeth are a progressive death metal band, not a heavy metal band. "Heavy Metal" is the term used to describe bands like current Metallica, Judas Priest, Iron Maiden, Early Man.....ect. Opeth have never had the styles of traditional heavy metal in their music, and mikeal akerfeldt himeself has stated many times (even in his official myspace page) that if he had to label his band, he would label them as "progressive death metal".

Another quick heads up, they have released two live CDs, not one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Metalstyle (talk • contribs) 04:38, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Amon Amarth arent associated with opeth anylonger, since the departure of Martin Lopez. Porcupine Tree is associated with Opeth for FOUR valid reasons, A)Steven Wilson has been has been an integral part of Opeth's Blackwater Park, Damnation and Deliverance albums as a producer. B)Steven Wilson has done numerous guest apperances on vocals during those three albums respectively. C)Mikael Akerfeldt contributed vocals to the Porcupine Tree album titled "Deadwing" and finally (the one point that might not count, but still should) D) Mikael Akerfeldt and Steven Wilson, along with Mike Portnoy, have an as-yet-untitled side project in the works. This has been well documented on Blabbermouth.net

FAC

Prose = words, text. So basically if someone is saying "The prose of Ulysses is impenetreble", they mean it's hard to read and the wording is confusing. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:22, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

When peopel refer to the prose on Wikipedia, they generally mean the text that constitutes the main body of the article, ie. everything from "John Fitzgerald Kennedy was an American politician . . ." to the end, minus the references, external links, media, and tables. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:26, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I think it would be beneficial for all music projects regardless of genre. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:51, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

You also might want to make a column for individuals. Two excellent articles for this are Frank Black and John Frusciante. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:53, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I think you really only want the best of the best anyway, since you could basically list every article in the Music category on the Featured Articles page. Audioslave is good, but we're trying to fix things with it, and it does go into a bit more detail than an article about a band of their prominence probably should (it's longer than U2, the band widely considered to be the biggest band in the world). WesleyDodds (talk) 04:56, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Of course, put down whatever you want. It's your page. I just really like making lists of things. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:59, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter

The February 2008 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is ready! Dr. Cash (talk) 05:18, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative music January 2008 Newsletter

The Alternative music WikiProject Newsletter Issue 10 - January 2008

"I still have people come up to me like, 'I really, really liked your last record.' 'Oh, thanks!' 'Are you going to do "Loser" tonight?' I'm like, 'Look, I'm six foot six. Beck is five foot sex, all right?'"- Thurston Moore Project news Radiohead, Slay Tracks (1933-1969), David Lovering, "I Don't Remember", U2, R.E.M., Anodyne (album) and Niandra Lades and Usually Just a T-Shirt reached featured article status in the past month, a record month for the WikiProject! Additionally, with the promotion of Radiohead, U2 and R.E.M., half of our Top Importance articles now have featured article status. Well done to Atlantik, Brandt Luke Zorn, CloudNine, the various WikiProject Powderfinger editors, Merbabu, WesleyDodds, Teemu08, NSR77 and Grim-Gym. The discographies of Dischord Records and Load Records reached featured list status during the past month. Well done to Drewcifer3000 (who wrote both featured lists). Powderfinger discography reached featured topic status during the past month. Well done to the various WikiProject Powderfinger editors. We collaborated on Mellon Collie and the Infinite Sadness, Franz Ferdinand (band), PJ Harvey and Michael Stipe during the past month. During the month of January, Rage Against the Machine, Pick Up the Pace, "Lost and Running", Bernard Fanning, Year Zero (album), Jon Coghill, "Losing My Religion" and "Touch Me I'm Sick" were promoted to good article status. Sign up for our B-class article drive on the project talk page! The goal is to increase a number of the project's B-class articles to GA or FA status within two months. The B-class article drive will run from February 1 to April 1, 2008. This month's "Recommended Alternative Album" is My Bloody Valentine - Isn't Anything (1988).

New members Skeeker, Dethzone, Sceptre, IN THE EFFIGY, Crislee 88, Grrrlriot and Indopug joined the alternative music fold during January. Editors User:WesleyDodds

You are receiving this newsletter because you have signed up for WikiProject Alternative music. If you wish to stop receiving this newsletter, or would like to receive it in a different form, add your name to the appropriate section here. This newsletter was delivered by the automated xihix(talk) 00:15, 2 February 2008 (UTC) .

On Alice in Chains

I left a somewhat long list of suggestions on the talk page. Good luck. --BritandBeyonce (talk) 08:14, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

If you're looking for a Staley pic, I think you can use a promotional pic of him. The fact that he's dead constitutes fair-use right there as there's "no free alternative". That pic could be used for his article's infobox as well. Just make sure you source the image properly (date, photographer etc). Could you tell me why that Unplugged Staley pic was removed from the AiC article? The way I see it, if you rationed that it was one of their last shows, and that Staley was in visibly bad health, you could pass it as fair-use. Cheers, indopug (talk) 14:17, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey. Its fine. Feel free to object so that I will also know what are my errors there. =) --BritandBeyonce (talk) 01:07, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Its up to you. SandyGeorgia is currently working on the dates and hyphens issues so better working it now or else, you'll get a heap of opposes. Arternatively, you can request LOCe to copyedit it now to avoid more opposes. Good luck. =) --BritandBeyonce (talk) 01:54, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

United Abominations

If you can't find negative reviews just use negative quotes from positive reviews. Reviewers may dismiss a song as repetitive, unimaginative or something. Anyway the first few sentences of writing and recording are really confusing, "Most of the record was recorded", the album featured a new band line up.[6][7] The recording line up comprised, i suggest a peer review and i'll comment. M3tal H3ad (talk) 04:23, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

United Abominations is looking very nice indeed, good job; the look thing I would suggest adding is a background section, if applicable. I might be seeing Megadeth in concert soon :) but I really haven't heard too much of them :(, what songs/albums do you recommend? I fiddled with the Staley pic a bit, moving it to the Unplugged section and changing the caption. Do you have a cite that says that he was "visibly in poor health at Unplugged"? I remember that was there a while back. indopug (talk) 04:46, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Just to let you know I'll review it on the weekend. M3tal H3ad (talk) 02:54, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Yea, it's alright. I actually prefer The Poison as the songs on '"Scream Aim Fire all sound similar. M3tal H3ad (talk) 03:41, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I download music, although if i really like the songs I'll go and buy the album. Sucks that the artists get a few dollars from such an overpriced piece of plastic. M3tal H3ad (talk) 05:53, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Woo, well I'm in the process of getting six articles to FA now. Quite a thorough review AIC is getting. M3tal H3ad (talk) 01:49, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I meant the AIC FAC. And i would appreciate it if you could add what information you can from the magazine. This interview [3] will help with the Sacrament section (only one i did) which discusses the band are changing record labels overseas. M3tal H3ad (talk) 01:56, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

well that sucks, they seem to be having a lot of family problems of late. M3tal H3ad (talk) 02:06, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Alice In Chains

Yeah, the article is well constructed and deserves to be an FA. If we get Slipknot a copyedit, it will easily be listed as an FA. Thanks for reading, ThunderMaster ^UTC 08:19, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Nevermorelogo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Nevermorelogo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 01:48, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Alice in Chains II

Yes, but my oppose still stands. I feel this can be a much better article given proper time and (most importantly) references. Still, you shouldn't worry about changing my opinion on FAC; the goal is to improve the article to the best of your ability. As I've repeatedly said, my library has a number of books on rock music, and quite a few pertaining to grunge bands like Alice in Chains (see Grunge music, where many of those references are used). Once I have the time and opportunity to use them for the article, I will. Until then, the article is lacking sources that exist (since I am aware of sources that can be used but have not been used) and thus fails the comprehensiveness criteria. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:10, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Which is good, but it's not necessarily the point. The point is there are offliine references I have access to that can be useful but I have not had the time to utilize. So in short it's my fault. It's something would like to fix, but don't really have the time to right now. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:18, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, please refrain from continuously posting on my talk page alerting me whenever you feel more sources have been added. I am indeed following the FAC and still note Wesley's oppose. Therefore, mine still stands. NSR77 ^T_C 05:04, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Congrats, what's next on the board? M3tal H3ad (talk) 06:52, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Congrats dude. indopug (talk) 07:01, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

What's next? indopug (talk) 07:02, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Slipknot AoF #2

The second AoF has been decided, Slipknot discography is the article chosen by vote. You can see what this task is for and its aims here. As you are a member of the project, your participation in this task is greatly welcomed and the quicker and better that we improve the article the more efficient the project will become. Please head over the the talk page and identify areas for improvement on the to-do list and begin to achieve these goals. Collaboration is the key word for the AoF and collaborating with 1 or more users on certain tasks is recommended, communications should be made on users talk pages. Rezter ^TALK 09:44, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Alice in Chains sunlogo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Alice in Chains sunlogo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:31, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

The AMG bio

Hey, I must admit the work you and Skel have done is admirable and I look forward to supporting it soon. The concerns I still have are left at FAC; the AMG bio thing is serious overlooking it can't reliably used as it is a tertiary source. Since we, Wikipedia, are one too, we have to source from only primary or secondary sources: magazine articles/reviews/interviews. (Note this refers only to their bio, not AMG reviews). When you're done with the fixes, page me and I'll give another once-over of the article and support :) Fantastic work, indopug (talk) 19:43, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I also just noticed, you've used blogspot as a source for utd abominations. Thats a definite no-no. indopug (talk) 19:50, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

re:lamb of god GA

No harm done, you can just renominate it immediately. I'm not interested in doing a full review, I was just sweeping for quick-fails. There's no prejudice for the next review, so renominating it is the best solution. It doesn't qualify for any other quick fail criteria, so don't worry. VanTucky 03:40, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it needs to stay for documentation of the GA process. But again, no worries, the next reviewer will see (or can be pointed to) my comments if necessary. They'll be no prejudice for the next review. VanTucky 04:07, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

There isn't enough mention on their early years for FA. It can still be improved by adding a style/lyrical theme section. M3tal H3ad (talk) 04:48, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Read about that on Blabbermouth, seems strange. Good to hear you enjoyed MH. M3tal H3ad (talk) 05:49, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Devourment peer review

Hi, just to let you know I have nominated Devourment for peer review at Wikipedia:Peer review/Devourment/archive1- any comments you may have would be appreciated. J Milburn (talk) 00:19, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem- the more you review yourself and read the reviews of others, the better you will get. I'll take a look at the review you mentioned later tonight. J Milburn (talk) 18:00, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

AoF Reminder

I would just like to remind you as a member of the Slipknot Wikiproject that Nominations are open for the third AoF candidate so please, nominate the article which you think deserves the AoF attention over at the talk page. Thanks very much and I would also like to say that work on the discography page is coming along good but all members are recommended to collaborate in helping develop the article. Rezter ^TALK 11:35, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Nice header

Hope you don't mind if I pinch it.... Two One Six Five Five ^τ _ʃ 18:20, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I meant in your userpage, actually. Two One Six Five Five ^τ _ʃ 22:00, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

WP:LOTD

Congratulations on your recent WP:FL promotion. You may be interested in participating the the selection of lists of the day and a list of the month for March or nominating lists for April.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 18:29, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for comming by and making a nomination. Your votes would be very helpful to this months selection process. Please come vote.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 22:44, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Vote at User:TonyTheTiger/List_of_the_Day/voting/200803 in the voting section. Note that your list is under consideration next month. Please vote for five of the current candidates. If we can demonstrate viability, we will shoot for the main page. There have been many proposals and this one like many has not been approved. Thus, I am trying to get it past the objections by showing that it will work. Part of that is showing that people will actually vote. Next month you will be able to vote for your own list. All lists will be eligible for the main page even if they have already been an experimental WP:LOTD.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 23:15, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

If you are still having trouble voting, let me know because I am suppose to close down voting at the end of the day on the 20th.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 18:28, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Voting occurs here. The candidates are on the page below.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 02:30, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Damageplan.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Damageplan.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 01:32, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:InfliktedCC.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:InfliktedCC.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 01:38, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

LoG semi protect

Done. By the way, do you have rollback? J Milburn (talk) 19:06, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Rollback is only a single click, and you can revert a big string of edits. Basically, it reverts all of the edits a user has just made in a row to an article, but only works with the last user to edit it. Sounds more complicated than it is, trust me. Used to be only admins who had it, but now established users can apply for it. You don't do much in the way of vandal fighting, you're more of an editor, are you not? You probably wouldn't get too much use out of it, but I guess it's worth having. You can apply here, or I can just give you it if you like. As for the semi-protection, vandalism will continue after the semi-protection is expired, almost certainly, but a permenent semi-protection is almost certainly out of the question. Just keep reverting- hidden comments also stem the flow a little sometimes, have you tried them? J Milburn (talk) 19:42, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

I've added some hidden comments. J Milburn (talk) 19:45, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Given you rollback, or I think I have, I've never done it before. I'll take a look over Black Tide now. J Milburn (talk) 19:56, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

I've given the article a copyedit and added some cats. I wouldn't go for GA yet- it is based mostly on Blabbermouth, and as an album is coming out soon, it would be declined anyway as it will soon document a current event. Also, requesting images takes a while, and it perhaps isn't worth it- I would rather not get involved requesting images on an article I'm not really linked with. Check out Connie Talbot; (and don't ask me why I got involved with that article... I just... did.) those three images took about six emails from me, emails from others, OTRS people and a good bit of time and confusion (from many people) to aquire... Also check out Chrome Division- no images, and only one album released, and that makes a nice GA. J Milburn (talk) 20:19, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I reckon if you expand it once the album is released, then it will make a great GA. Sadly, it isn't eligible for dyk, as it would have had to have been written/significantly expanded a couple of days ago. Libris Mortis isn't on the main page right now, but it will be in about an hour and a half, if there's an admin ready to update it. I'll take a look at Tapeworm now. J Milburn (talk) 20:47, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

I realised you weren't the one to write it, but, strangely, I had never heard of the band, despite being a big NIN fan, so at least I learnt something! And no, sorry, that expansion isn't large enough- the article must have been expanded at least fivefold. There is obviously a level of leniancy, but I just don't think your expansion is enough, sorry. To be honest, if you want to get on dyk, your best bet is to write an article from scratch. J Milburn (talk) 20:58, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

You're not a D&D player by any chance, are you? Only I was looking for someone to have a quick glance over Libris Mortis- despite the rather low number of available sources, I was considering nominating for GA. J Milburn (talk) 21:02, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it's a bit specialist for a non-gamer. Thanks anyway. J Milburn (talk) 21:09, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Machine Head

Hey man, nice job with the page! As I am also a huge MH fan, let me know if you can use my help! Dark Executioner (talk) 13:07, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

opeth

okay, now you're just wasting space by changing perfectly good hyphens to colons. also, the godsmack article uses en dashes. = ∫_t^c 5th Eye 22:58, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

it's fine if you prefer colons; that doesn't mean you should go changing every page from colons to dashes. i don't think it confuses anything at all. i tried to see if there was a standard for this to no avail. = ∫_t^c 5th Eye 23:02, 25 February 2008 (UTC)