User talk:J Milburn/archive9

This is an archive of past discussions. Please do not edit it, it is for reference purposes only. If you wish to continue a discussion here, please do so on my talk page.

Re: Dungeons & Dragons (album)

A cursory glance at the article suggests you should cut the PR short and head off to FAC. I don't really think anything major will materialise in a PR, and nothing that can't be solved in an FAC. Enjoy your first star! LuciferMorgan 20:22, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Cool, I'm happy you're going to FAC. By the way, I have only one album FA to my name (the other two are for songs). Having said that, I'm happy you think my writing is quality enough to be under the impression I've penned more FAs than I actually have. I'm possibly going to FAC South of Heaven sometime though. If you want some people to nitpick at the article, try ♫ Cricket02, 17Drew, CloudNine, WesleyDodds and M3tal H3ad. Them lot can easily groom an article to FA standard with their high quality feedback, so try them out sometime. LuciferMorgan 20:36, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Since it wasn't even up an hour, I think it'd be best to delete your withdrawn PR. LuciferMorgan 21:04, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Just saw that this got FA status last month. Congratulations! A well deserved promotion in my opinion! Cheers, CP 05:53, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Britney Spears peer review

Hello. Remember me? :) The time has come. Please do a peer review for Britney Spears. Wikipedia:Peer review/Britney Spears. Thanks. Oidia (talk) 14:44, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

RosAsm Deletion

Hi ! It seems there has been some misunderstanding about the RosAsm article. The last version was clearly too big, I intended to post a lighter one similar to the french version with the appropriate sources concerning notability (As a NES Emulator written with RosAsm). I have no account in the english version of Wikipedia, yet you can answer on my french talk page, if you want. Regards. 134.151.34.244 19:12, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Concerning the spammy presentation, I agree with you and this should be fixed. For the notability, RosAsm is in fact not among the most used assemblers as well as are most of those listed in the List_of_assemblers (like SjASMPlus for example, which has a wiki). You can check yourself that several assemblers in this list would fall in the same non-notability category as RosAsm. Concerning the reliable sources, like for SjASMPlus, except the assembler website there is a limited number of others ([1], [2], [3],[4], ...) which are dedicated or related to it, though there are some. About the deletion debate, it concerned the last article POV problems and I already gave you an example of a big project(+15000 lines of code) using RosAsm. Regards 134.151.34.244 19:06, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, as I said on your French talk page, I will answer you here. None of those are considered reliable sources- yes, programs have been made using it, and yes, it exists, but has anyone really written about it? It isn't really my area of expertise, but have there been magazine articles? Newspaper articles? Entries on reliable programming sites? Reviews? None of the articles you cite are reliable- the first one is first party (written by people directly linked to RosAsm) the second is geocities (almost always considered unreliable) the third is a little better, but is tutorials rather than articles about the compiler. The next source shows it is in use, but is no good as a source for an encyclopedia entry, and the same for the last. Sorry, I'm still not convinced. J Milburn 23:20, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

For assemblers, the notability cannot only (and even rarely) be established by considering magazine articles, as they are specialized software mostly ignored in press, except for the most common ones. Consequently - and to stick to a strict interpretation of Wikipedia rules - many (SjASMPlus, GoAsm, PAL-III, Sphinx_C--, A56_(software), Linoleum_programming_language, ...) assemblers' wiki pages should be considered for deletion, as they fall under the same non-notability clause as RosAsm. However, I think they render an account of the diversity of assemblers and thus improve Wikipedia's accuracy (which would definitely lacks otherwise). 134.151.34.244 10:09, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

How do you propose we write decent encyclopedia articles on these assemblers without reliable sources? As for your concerns about those other articles- I will review them and nominate them for deletion if appropriate. J Milburn 14:44, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't propose anything such, I'm stating a fact. My concerns are only about coherence and as long as the same rules apply to every article, that's fine for me. I'm looking forward to seeing what will emerge from your reviews. (Note that my previous list of NRS assemblers was not exhaustive, you could add Yasm and possibly others) 134.151.34.244 20:00, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, I have nominated a few for deletion- see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A56 (software), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sphinx C--, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SjASMPlus and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GoAsm. This doesn't seem to be an area that gets much attention in reliable sources, and so it is an area that, fairly, Wikipedia shouldn't extensively cover either. I will take a look at the list of assemblers article, and nominate any that don't seem notable for deletion. J Milburn 20:08, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

WP:AFD

Can you take a look at 99 Ways to Die (song), and AFD it if necessary? Thanks. LuciferMorgan 13:06, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Dear J Milburn, thank you for withdrawing the nomination. I GREATLY appreciate that you recognized my effort to improve the article and think you are a good Wikipedian for being able to acknowledge the improvements made to the article during the discussion and to be willing to consider these improvements. That shows a good deal of class and character and I commend you for it! :) Thanks again and have an awesome afternoon! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 17:44, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

If you got time, can you possibly AFD I Could Care Less? Thanks. LuciferMorgan 15:02, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Articles related to GoAsm

I closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GoAsm with a result of "delete", since there were no compelling arguments to keep it. There are still a few pages that link to it, including GoLink, GoRC (resource compiler), and GoBug. I haven't checked those articles to see if they have the same problems that brought GoAsm to deletion, so you may want to check them out and see if they merit deletion. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 16:36, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

May I ask a favor?

I was wondering if I could impose on you to take a few minutes and review Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional diseases. I seem to be of the minority point of view and maybe you could either add support to keeping the list or help me see where I might be totally off base in my thinking. Thank you in advance.

Additionally I would like to thank you for your previous assistance Dbiel ^(Talk) 01:45, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to review the AfD and adding your comments. It is greatly appreciated. Dbiel ^(Talk) 12:01, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Where's Neil When You Need Him? and Strange as Angels

Hi Milburn, apologies for not informing you of the prod and image tagging. It's just that when I tag such things, they usually end up deleted anyway. I should probably explain why I added them. I think there are many albums which don't really warrant articles. A month ago, there were 200 articles in Category:mixtape albums. Now there's 30. I'm doing the same thing to Category:tribute albums— basically weeding out all the non-notable albums. If I see sources that clearly establish notability (e.g. Radiodread), I won't tag it. But most pages are essentially just an infobox and track list with no real potential to expand. I'm more than happy to take these to AfD is anyone disagrees. (I've read somewhere that Wikipedia has 800,000 more articles than it needs to!). Spellcast 08:01, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Trivium

Hi J - Per my Jarred Bonaparte citation, feel free to move that wherever you feel is appropriate--just wanted to add it because I had received complaints about not being able to verify that Jarred was indeed an original member of the band, so I did it pretty hastily. Thanks! --weriov 16:33, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Tokio Hotel image

My mistake. It's true, it can be replaceable if a free image is found. I made some changes and removed the tag, I hope it's ok that I removed the tag myself. And hopefully with the way it is now, the image won't get deleated, at least until someone comes accross a free image that's clear enough. --Harout72 19:03, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

So you're saying that there is no way to save this image from being deleated, even though, I have included an explanation for the purpose of its use which is supposed to make it qualify for fair use under U.S. Copyright law and Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline ?--Harout72 22:14, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Change (song)

Hey, was looking at today's AFD page and noticed that this one had been closed as delete, but the link was blue. Seems like it's a recreation. Thought you might want to take a look. Thanks! GlassCobra 01:49, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Happy Birthday

May your day be filled with God's blessings. Dbiel ^(Talk) 10:14, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! J Milburn 11:53, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Dragon Tails Deletion

Why was this made a speedy deletion? Less than an hour gives hardly anyone a chance to even respond. Some of us do not spend all our lives on this one location, or on the web at all. I cannot spend all day working on a page. And then "until the issue is settled"? Where is there a forum to "Settle this isssue" when EVERYTHING is deleted or protected? And why the hostility towards the webcomic? It's not a conflict, it's a redirect for a MISPELLING of the animated show! And I put up a disambugation page to resolve any mistake! CFLeon 19:40, 26 October 2007 (UTC) (Sorry if I sound upset, but it was a time-consuming pain to write the page only to have it deleted by the next time I got on the web without ANY recourse. And for a mispelling redirect! CFLeon 19:45, 26 October 2007 (UTC))

Chinese Wikipedia problems

Hey Josh

I've had a message on Facebook from a guy called Brian Tracy who, on my recommendation, emailed you about getting round the Peoples' Republic's ban on Wikipedia, but says that you never got back to him. Could you perhaps take a little time to do this? See you around :-)--Voxpuppet (talk • contribs) 23:35, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Where've you been?

Heya I notice you've been active on here recently, but you've not been on MSN (well, I know you use Trillian) for a couple of weeks now - have you blocked me? If so, please tell me why: have I caused you some offence?--Vox Humana 8' 16:17, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Godsmack article

Hi, this is User:Skeeker, I put in a reguest for Godsmack to be a good article and you left comments. I took in consideration of what you said and created a sandbox page to work out edits. Please see this to review my edits and tell me what else to improve. I seem to be the only major contributor to the article, so help is nice. Thank you very much. Skeeker _[Talk] 23:08, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Could you show me an example of a good reference? Skeeker _[Talk] 00:32, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the reference example. There has been somebody (Special:contributions/24.187.101.85) adding original research to the article for a while. Many unofficial users have been doing this for quite some time. Could you please place a block on the page so only registered users can use it? Thank you, Skeeker _[Talk] 21:44, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip, if it keeps up I will try that. How close is the article to GA status? Skeeker _[Talk] 20:55, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Godsmack GA

I added Godsmack to the GA Nominees page and somebody put LONG next to it. What does that mean? Skeeker _[Talk] 21:27, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

I understand, thank you, Skeeker _[Talk] 18:40, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:Connie Talbot X Factor crop.JPG

Your assertion that 'all photos of living people are ineligible for fair use' is simply wrong. Hear me out, don't just send me some template message- I'm an administrator, I am usually the one sending out those messages. That image was uploaded with a detailed fair use rationale describing why it added an awful lot to ther article, what it added to the article, and why it was not replaceable. I will repeat that here- the article (along with many secondary sources) talks about the 'cute factor' of Connie, specifically mentioning her 'gap-toothed smile'. Now, that photo offered two things to the article- it showed a picture of her during the Britain's Got Talent competition, which she will never take part in again, and showed a picture of her with her 'gap-toothed smile', which, as the image source page picks up on, no longer exists. Regardless of whether the deletion was incorrect, I resent that 1) It was just automatically deleted, without going through the normal procedure, 2) That I, as a good faith (and experienced) uploader was not informed, and 3) That you believe that no image of a living person can be used under fair use. Please reply on my talk page. J Milburn (talk) 15:16, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your message, and I apologize if you were offended or took resentment from my actions. In response to your queries,

1. The deletion was effected per the proviso to CSD:I7, although perhaps in retrospect should have been listed for 48 hours.
2. I delete a large amount of content per the various CSDs and try to leave a meaningful deletion reason in the deletion log. It would be completely impractical for me to notify everyone individually.
3. The non-free content criteria are extremely strict and require that no free equivalent exist, or be creatable which could serve the same purpose. There may exist photographs of living people which cannot be so replaced, but I severely doubt this is one. A textual description combined with a free photograph of Connie would, in my view, serve the purpose.

In view of your message I have restored the image but am placing it on IFD. Stifle (talk) 15:25, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

A band's lead paragraph.

In the lead paragraph of a band article, should it be EX: Metallica are an American heavy metal band, or is it, Metallica is an American heavy metal band.

I believe it is the first one, because Metallica is not a band, Metallica is the name of a band. I am having this problem on Alice in Chains with User:WesleyDodds. And I don't want an edit war, but I believe I am right. Skeeker _[Talk] 18:49, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind, I see the problem. I was wrong. Skeeker _[Talk] 01:30, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Help Needed

I was wondering if you could help me with the Eagle Series. It is the first article I have ever created properly, aside from my user page of course! but I don't know how to do all the Wikpedia sourcing and stuff. Most of the stuff I have got off the Wikipedia article for Simon Scarrow who is the author of the series. The page has been marked as patrolled and I am not entirely sure what that means. Will it be deleted? I will only be able to ad references etc to the latest book in the series (which doesn't have its own page yet) as all of my other books from the said series are at home. Thanks for your time. TheTrojanHought (talk) 19:24, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help. I have made a few changes to it which you suggested, and I am also looking at other articles on book series for ideas of sructure etc. Hopefully some other people will help me, as there are obviously other users who are fans of the Eagle Series who edit wikipedia. Thanks again. TheTrojanHought (talk) 10:15, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

WP:AFD

If it's ok, can you take a look through the hefty amount of articles for Megadeth songs? Most say it's a single from X album. They're all listed in the Megadeth template. Also, there's a bunch of songs by Black Label Society which need to be AFD'd and are also listed in their respective template. Thanks, and I hope all is well. LuciferMorgan (talk) 22:33, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Godsmack

Hi, would you please talk some sense into User:Demantos. He is trying to merge Godsmack discography with Godsmack. Godsmack has enough music to warrent a seperate article for discography, and any substantially successful band has one on wikipedia. Please comment on his talk page, and comment here.

Thank you,

Skeeker _[Talk] 01:40, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Megadeth

Hi, I think I created all of those articles, the only reason is because they are singles. It is okay if you delete them, I did a half fast job on them, lol. Cheers. Skeeker _[Talk] 23:46, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Metallica

Hello J, i have re-written the Metallica article over the past week and with the very useful feedback you have provided on past reviews i was hoping you could leave some comments at Metallica's peer review or make appropriate changes to the article. Thanks :) M3tal H3ad (talk) 07:01, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. Reminds me when i had like a 33k connection on dial-up i would disconnect loading two web pages at once ugh! M3tal H3ad (talk) 03:09, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Spotlight

Wikipedia:Spotlight, a page you created, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Spotlight and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Spotlight during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.

This is a great idea, but I feel that it is very similar to WP:ACID. I hope you are not hurt because of the nomination. ~Iceshark7 (talk) 18:49, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Single Song AfDs

I saw your impressive list of Megadeth AfDs, and voted to delete. You know that for things like that, long sets of identical-style articles, they can be listed as 1 AfD, with multiple articles. Just a heads up, thanks for the good work. Mbisanz (talk) 18:26, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Alice in Chains

Alice in Chains is a current Good Article, but now it is a FAC! I would appreciate if you were to comment on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Alice in Chains.
Thank you,
Skeeker _[Talk] 23:50, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm just not very good with images, lol! How do I lower the resolution of the logo, or should I just remove it? I am going to work on the Staley picture a bit.
Thank you,
Burningclean _{[Speak the truth!]} 19:08, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I can't download stuff like that though, this is my parents computor (I'm 14). Is there any way that you might downsize it? I can do the rationale, that should be simple. Also for the Staley picture, here is a good place. I asked User:M3tal H3ad if he would get an image for me (he rules!) but has yet to respond.
Thank you,
Burningclean _{[Speak the truth!]} 19:30, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

That's the one I wanted! Again, I have to ask my parents if I can sign up to Flickr (they don't like the computor being messed with). I showed you that to see if you or M3tal H3ad would be willing to get an image for me. Sorry about this. Thank you very much though.
Thank you,
Burningclean _{[Speak the truth!]} 19:43, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I gave the source, I don't know how the black backgroud got there, but that is the source. Can I cite a lyric booklet?
Thank you,
Burningclean _{[Speak the truth!]} 20:08, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

There is a banner here if I save that and cut of the bottom myself it will be my work right?
Thank you,
Burningclean _{[Speak the truth!]} 20:23, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I edited it down and the resolution is not the best, but can I upload it as my own?
Thank you,
Burningclean _{[Speak the truth!]} 20:27, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm trying to upload it but it is saying there is a corrupt extention or something like that.
Thank you,
Burningclean _{[Speak the truth!]} 20:37, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

WOO it worked! Would you take a look at it? I have a few questions, please answer them, they are important: Can I cite a lyric booklet? And are these okay sources: [5] and [6] I don't know if they are, but they are the same interview, I just don't know if I can use these sites, I can't find the interview elsewhere.
Thank you,
Burningclean _{[Speak the truth!]} 20:49, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

The cd book is the only reliable source I found. Is this reliable?
Thank you,
Burningclean _{[Speak the truth!]} 21:08, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah it can be deleted. I only have two more citations to take care pf that you listed I do believe. Once all the crap citations are taken care of is the article closer to FA?
Thank you,
Burningclean _{[Speak the truth!]} 21:18, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Everything you listed has been taken care of. Re-review? I feel a second band FA coming pretty soon. Would you mind e-mailing the Flickr user to use the picture of Staley?
Thank you,
Burningclean _{[Speak the truth!]} 21:31, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Done. If Stillinchains.net is still in there somewhere please let me know, I think I got rid of it.
Thank you,
Burningclean _{[Speak the truth!]} 22:47, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Do you think I should submit it for FAC, I've got everything prepared.
Thank you,
Burningclean _{[Speak the truth!]} 23:04, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Alright, here it is Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Alice in Chains. If this passes I will be the only member of Wikiproject metal with two featured bands, that is quite awesome. Thank you very much for reviewing.
Thank you,
Burningclean _{[Speak the truth!]} 23:17, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Enochian Theory

Hello

My name is Ben and I am the custodian of the Enochian Theory wikipedia page.

I have re-edited the page including linked the magazines referenced to their appropriate wiki page, hopefully clearing up the supposed triviality of their magazine appearances.

I have also posted external links to any qoutes or comments I ahve referenced in the article, so that you can view them and verify them with a click of a button.

Your comments would be most welcome as I attempt to bring the article in to line with what you the editors are asking.

Many thanks

Mr B Bond —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr B Bond (talk • contribs) 09:19, 20 December 2007 (UTC) <!-

Mr B Bond should read the policy which says that article do not have owners, so it is questionable to name oneself the "custodian" of an article. It is great that he works to maintain and improve the article by adding references. Watchlisting the article and reverting any vandalism which might occur is also a good idea. Edison (talk) 04:46, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Apologies. That was what I meant to imply by the term custodian.

It was not my article originally. I have merely taken it upon myself to continue to maintain and to amend any untrue material.

Many thanks

Mr B Bond —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr B Bond (talk • contribs) 11:03, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Just a line to say thank you for having a look at the enochian theory wiki page and posting your support of the article on the talk page.

I'm not very computer literate, let alone how to succesfully format a wiki page (LOL), but I have tried to present the page as best I can within my scope of ability.

Your help and support is much appreciated.

With regard to the magazine articles I have cited in the article, I have briefly read over the qoutation policy here on wiki and would like to try and represent them better in the reference section i.e adding relevant page numbers from said magazines, publisher details and if sucha thig exists an isbn number for that magazine.

Is that what would be considered appropriate for making the references in question 'better' in terms of their reliability.

I will not be able to do this for all of them, short of buying the appropriate back issue, but will do in the cases where I have a copy of the magazine.

Mr B Bond (talk) 16:57, 22 December 2007 (UTC)Mr B Bond

Hello.

I have attempted to make the magazine references at the bottom of the article better by adding publisher information and ISSN numbers where I have been able to find them. I should have the last bits of information I need by the end of today and will add these to the reference section.

I believe that an editor as well as another third party has also tinkered with the text in the article to source some of the qoutes ot their appropriate external link.

I still worry that this may not be enough to satisfy the 'notability' point.

I appreciate that some of the people who will ultimately make the decision with regards to the articles fate, may live in another country, not be familiar with magazines/music channels cited etc, but I've done as much as I can with what I have.

The band won't have any more media coverage to add, until they have their new single recorded and ready to release. I can only provide more internet links as further references, and there seems to be some difference of opinion with regards to some of their suitability.

Regardless of the outcome of the decision made on this article, I would like to thank you for your input and advice on this matter.

Many thanks

Mr B Bond (talk) 10:11, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Band name disambiguation

I request that bands with names easily confusable with real world entities have (Band) as a disambiguating suffix. This is to avoid wasting the time of editors interested in the real-world things the band names mimic, either by being drawn to the article itself or to an AFD for the band. Many band articles get deleted, so there are lots of AFDs about bands. Any small group of musicians can start a band, choose a name which would lead others to think it refers to a place, theory, bird, beverage, means of transportation, etc, etc, and create a Wikipedia article about it to promote it. It is unreasonable to expect the real-world thing to have to be the one to disambiguate itself with a suffix of (Place), (Theory). I have nothing against band articles and have in the past worked hard to find refs to prove the notability of bands I've never heard of before seeing an AFD, but it is just not my cup of tea, and I do not wish to waste my time clicking on a AFD for "Integrated Circuit" or "Edison Lab" or "'57 Chevy" just to find it is about some little known band deserving deletion and not something I am interested in. If a band name is well known to society in general, like "The Beatles" or "The Doors" then no disambiguation is needed. If it has a distinctive spelling like "The Beatles, " "Led Zeppelin" or Floydian Slips, then no disambiguation is needed. If it is strange enough to be unlikely to be confused with a real-world interest, like Strawberry Alarm Clock," "Mink Pencil Sharpener" or "Rabid Vacuum Cleaner" then no disambiguation is needed. Edison (talk) 04:35, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps this would be the best option for the article concerning Enochian Theory. The article was started by a person other than myself and so the title was already in place when I found it.

In the interest of clarity I beleive that this would be the best way forward for the article, should it survive deletion, which I sincerely hope it does.

Mr B Bond —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr B Bond (talk • contribs) 11:06, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Policy on Wikipedia often follows the consensus which emerges in fora such as AFD, rather than being something created by a panel of experts in congress assembled at some policy page. Let's allow a free exchange of opinion on AFD pages and elsewhere and see what consensus emerges. You have twice posted on my talk page arguing that I should not have the right to state my views on AFDs about bands regarding the desirability of adding a disambiguating suffix (band) after the name when it sounds like a real world entity, on the ground that this practice is contrary to consensus as you see it. Please tone down the rhetoric and comment on articles and proposals, rather than attacking the person whose opinions you disagree with. (Please do not exile me to Conservapiedia as you implied!). I am not opposed to popular culture or innovative bands: I was a member of a rock band which played for pay every week, and I was a disk jockey on a commercial radio station. I think I have articulated my views and the reasons behind them. You are welcome to disagree, and I value your views. Edison (talk) 15:46, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

My request that (band) be used for disambiguation to avoid confusion with a real world entity is consistent with Wikipedia:Naming conventions#Album and song titles and band names which says "When necessary, disambiguation should be done using (band), (album), or (song) (such as Anthrax (band) or Insomniac (album)); use further disambiguation only when needed (for example X (U.S. band), X (Australian band))." The area of apparent disagreement is just when it is "necessary." Edison (talk) 22:14, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

I wuld argue against the need for disambiguation for many bands, as stated above. For many 'real world" entities the article will exist before the band article is created (Mount Rushmore for instance, so the Mount Rushmore (band) disambiguation would be pretty automatic. (Here I thing you would agree with giving the plain vanilla title to the monument). In cases where there is no such real world entity (Enochian theory, for instance) it is not that big an issue and I could see leavinh the band name un-suffixed. We are left with the plausible names (Valley of Decapitated Horses sounds like some archeological find) or band names which are variations on the names of real world entities, where it is only an issue of convenience in AFD viewing and of general encyclopedia style. Edison (talk) 20:32, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Vanderbilt, the Netherlands

Can you please cite which criteria that states that "all real locations are notable" that you closed per WP:SNOW? I've never seen that being mentioned before and WP:OUTCOMES#Places seems like an edge case at best for a hamlet with a population of 56 with an article that would struggle to get past its current size. -Halo (talk) 02:16, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

The difference between a semi-obscure band and a small hamlet is that a band can't easily be merged elsewhere with little to no loss, and Wikipedia happily acknowledges that the vast majority of bands should be deleted unless they have actually had some legitimate coverage. Some historical relevance or media coverage is clutching at straws in my view as often you'd be scraping the barrel for either, particularly when you consider that larger schools often aren't treated with the same way. You can cite WP:IAR, but I still don't see it being a WP:SNOW case and as such I'm sending it over to WP:DRV - I don't think "it existing" should be the blanket case for places being kept -Halo (talk) 13:43, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Both of the places you cite have over 100x the population of this hamlet. I am wondering if it is a hoax now - nothing on Google at all -Halo (talk) 14:12, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Your ankle

Sorry to hear about your broken ankle, especially this time of year! I hope you're out of bed and feeling better soon. Corvus cornix_talk 23:31, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, in that case, Merry Christmas.  :) Corvus cornix_talk 23:49, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

NPW

Hi J Milburn,

nice to hear from you ;-)

The devs are aware of it, and I hope it will be fixed soon. I'll poke Martin anyway. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 17:27, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

TWINKLE may be of some use. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 17:30, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Queen of Babble

Hi J Milburn, I think the PROD notice you left for me is really meant for User:Dar chick (my only contribution was a lead line for context.) Thanks, Marasmusine (talk) 18:07, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Thomas Evan Nicholas (Niclas y Glais)

Why did you delete this article 2 minutes after I started typing in it ? --Darren Wyn Rees (talk) 19:03, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Secret Scout

You're right...I should have used prod. Thanks. SaveThePoint (talk) 19:12, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Frederick J. Stephens

I have gotten the information from the Stephens himself, how do I verify that, do you want a copy of the e-mail ? --Morphinea (talk) 19:39, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

If I make a web site and use that as reference, is that good enough ? When it comes to notability he is one of the leading experts on Third Reich daggers, he's not writing novels, but reference books used by collectors all over the world --Morphinea (talk) 20:00, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

responsible editing

I was going to try my best to assume good faith, and assume your overly hasty nomination of Jamal Ahmed Mohammed Ali Al-Badawi was because you were a well-meaning, but inexperienced contributor. I was going to assume you were unaware of the advice in the policy to refrain from nominating newly created articles, because some contributors create them in steps, due to flaky computers, or flaky connection.

Then I checked your contribution history, and saw you were an administrator, who should after all, know better.

I really would like to feel I could always rely on sober fair judgment from the wikipedia's administrators. I really would like to feel I could always rely on the wikipedia's administrators having enough maturity and humility to acknowledge that they remained capable of error, and were willing to acknowledge their errors.

I wish I could. Sadly, experience has shown me that the ranks of administrators includes a leavening of individuals who won't acknowledge mistakes.

When I see an administrator who appears to think being trusted with administrator authority has freed them from an obligation to abide by the wikipedia's policies I can lose my perspective. I did so here. User:Sherucji was correct, the newly created article was about an individual for whom the US intelligence establishment has been unable to choose one consistent name.

I made a mistake. And I will acknowledge it in the {{afd}} in a minute.

• I am going to urge you, in the strongest possible terms, to consider complying more closely with the advice in the policy, if you are ever going to make any further nominations for deletion.
  • I am going to urge you to exercise less haste in your nominations.
  • I am going to urge you to remember that you should be nominating articles for deletion based on whether the subject merits coverage, not on the current state of the article. I urge you to spend a minute or so performing a google search on the topics you are considering nominating an article, so you can have an informed opinion on the topic, not the article.

Candidly, Geo Swan (talk) 20:40, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick closing. Thanks for being able to consider you may have made a lapse. Since the {{afd}} is closed I won't leave my own acknowledgement of error there.

I am going to apologize for being so tough on you. I am prolific. I write on controversial topics. And I have had a lot of really unpleasant experiences in the deletion fora -- personal attacks, wikistalking, and other less trying concerns. Earlier today I was offering an account of one classic case of a lapse. An article nominated for deletion one minute after I started it, then deleted in spite of the {{hangon}} I placed on it, while I drafted my explanation for why it didn't merit deletion. Getting the overly hasty deletion of that article reversed must have cost me close to 20 hours.

I think I must have had my frustration over that fiasco in mind when I left you this heated note above.

And since you are clearly one of the admins who can acknowledge error it was completely out of place. My apologies. I'll offer an acknowledgement of error, and an apology, in a more public place, if you want.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 20:53, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Heresy_%28band%29

Dear J Milburn,

you just deleted a page I began to create even before I got anywhere with it. I followed Wikipedia's tutorial by entering my references first and was about to start writing the article, then you deleted it. You cited "blatant self-promotion" I think which is incorrect as I want to write an article about a band that split up in 1995 and that I like very much. Google has many references to them and they are therefore not obscure / insignificant. The 8 references I entered were a starting point only.

If I went about the article the wrong way do let me know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dark Heretic (talk • contribs) 23:21, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Chevelle

Hello, would you mind reviewing Chevelle and commenting here: Wikipedia:Peer review/Chevelle, please and thank you.
Thank you,
Burningclean _{[Speak the truth!]} 10:49, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

I reviewed that article for you, I hope I was of some kind of help, I've never reviewed before. I fixed everything on Chevelle accept fixing the member changing paragraphs, I'm going to work on them now. I got rid of the magazine reference, I didn't put it there so I don;t know the rest of the information on it. By the way thanks for the comment, "Sorry, I know I'm divulging, but "Christianity contoversy" is the best section title I have ever seen.", that was really funny. :)
Thank you,
Burningclean _{[Speak the truth!]} 03:35, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

You don't know what featurable is? Burningclean _{[Speak the truth!]} 21:26, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I do. Wikipedia is fun, maby you should start doing FAs. Burningclean _{[Speak the truth!]} 21:32, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Lets be nice

As the other A7-decliner, you might want to comment at User talk:Keilana#Lets be nice and/or Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lets be nice rather than have the conversation spread across multiple talkpages. I'm reluctant to post it on the (multiple) nominator's own talk page on DFTT grounds; in light of the recent tone of the talkpage, there's a good chance it would flare into a flamewar, and (given that it would be a case of one editor v three admins), it's pretty obvious how it would end, and that wouldn't do anyone any good. — iridescent 01:32, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

In response to your message

It would be very helpful if you put some more information about him and his work in the article. I'm sure doing that would make the article more easy to read. Sorry for the earlier misunderstanding. Sinclair ^{talk/contribs} 05:14, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Reply

I didn't think a disambig. page was necessary--there is only one relevant article. I'm not sure many people will be typing in "Brockerhoff". But if you think otherwise, it's not a big deal. This editor has created a great deal of articles that need attention that I'm taking to the Visual Arts wikiproject for some help (most are taken from the German wiki and need extensive copyediting). I'll be focusing on this. Thanks. freshacconcispeaktome 14:59, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Assault on Lake Casitas (book)

Thanks, I'm glad I could help. Happy New Year :-) Bláthnaid 23:06, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

RE: A question

I will be working on wikpedia basicaly when I can, so there will always be stuff that I want to work on, but ther is a somewhat list I have.

• Children of Bodom
• Opeth
• Stavesacre (this will be hard they have almost no info online)
• Guns N' Roses (if I do this it probably won't be by myself)
• Lamb of God (band) (I think you are doing this one)
• Machine Head (I will probably do this one soon)
• Mudvayne (probably the only nu metal I like, that I can think of anyway)
• Nevermore
• Queensryche
• Sepultura
• Soulfly
• Shadows Fall
• Skid Row
• Static-X

That is my somewhat list, I'm not sure how many or when I will do them, but what I know is I have to much free time, lol! I'm not sure about album articles, because I don't get how you get all of that recording info into and stuff like that, but there are a few I think would be cool. EX: Kill 'Em All, Master of Puppets, Ride the Lightning, ...And Justice for All (album), Appetite for Destruction, Use Your Illusion I and II, Dirt (album), Jar of Flies. As for Trivium, I don't like them, so they don't really interest me. They have fantastic music but the lyrics and vocals ruin it for me. I'm am going to put this message on User talk:M3tal H3ad also. Burningclean _{[Speak the truth!]} 04:01, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I am probably going to work on Mudvayne and Machine Head pretty soon. Do you think Chevelle is featurable? Burningclean _{[Speak the truth!]} 20:05, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Flirtini

My apologies on that. Huge lack of judgment on my part. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 16:39, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of EFanzines

Whilst your "speedy deletion" of my entry on eFanzines may fall within the strict letter of the law in regard to my failure to indicate precisely why it is notable (eFanzines is the single largest online distribution point for science fiction fanzines), I feel I could at least have been given an opportunity to expand the piece before you wiped it from existence. I was compiling links indicating eFanzine' notability when you deleted my initial entry, less than an hour after I began work on it. Is it possible to restore it, so I can add the material needed? If not, I'll probably not bother. Ghostwords (talk) 17:58, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

My sincere thanks for your equally speedy resolution of this: much appreciated. In future, I'll aim to get the job done in fewer stages. Happy new year! Ghostwords (talk) 18:12, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Reply... (can't think of a better subject)

Hiya! Great to hear you'll be back... as for that AFD, I've voted on it - go look for yourself. --Vox Humana 8' 22:37, 31 December 2007 (UTC)