User talk:Twsx/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Thanks.

you got user 65.222.235.195, i just petitioned to get him banned. i suggest a longer ban though, he has bee vandalizing quite alot for quite awile. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 9k (talk • contribs) 14:43, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 01:29, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

"Huggler Ignored!" userbox

I'm happy to be whitelisted. I guess I'd like a Userbox for "Huggler Ignored" - "This user is proud to be ignored by Huggler" , since I'm not a Huggler user. Hmmm? --Lexein (talk) 08:10, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't get it. :( ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 22:38, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

I think it's something of an accomplishment to be whitelisted. And since Huggler is your creation, I thought you might prefer to control the creation of any infoboxes for Huggler. Sorry, lame request. --Lexein (talk) 01:38, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh. :) No, i give up any and all rights to the term "Huggler". You may use it in any way you like. :D ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 14:43, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Bad Man

The article Bad Man has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unreferenced article about a non-charting and non-notable rap album.

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. Fages (talk) 17:08, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Auditorium flash game.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Auditorium flash game.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 05:00, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

RE: Welcome back

Thanks. I wouldn't really say I'm back, though. I just wanted to do a little editing without using an anon all the time. I'll never do as much editing like I once did. Just a little bit here and there. Navnløs (talk) 16:13, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Twsx! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only.  If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:43, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Amon Amarth and Viking metal

Editors and IPs continue to go back and forth over whether or not Amon Amarth play Viking metal. Please join the discussion at Talk:Amon Amarth#Consensus on Viking Metal or not. Please keep discussion there, not here. Thank you! Wilhelm Meis (☎ Diskuss | ✍ Beiträge) 23:56, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Re: Code

Thanks Twsx. I'm quite concerned that this is a bad news sort of code. Did you see his comment on Navnlos'/Blizzardbeast's talk page? "make the changes I want" (Might not be exact quote I can't remember) - that is worrying. I'm gonna get someone to look into the code. Any ideas about what we can do about it? It's gonna start and edit war and he [and possible anyone else] will be blocked. Scarian^{Call me Pat} 21:43, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Greetings

I saw your comment on Pat's (Scarian) page and I'm glad you have decided to stop worrying about line breaks/ comma breaks. I have nothing to do with them anymore, either. Though I still do try to keep the ones that are in place the same. I see that what with you reporting me for 3RR you are still out to get me and very quick with it, too. You might be interested to know that Pat nominated me for adminship (and no, it wasn't an April Fool's joke, though I thought it was). I'm not saying this to show off (I actually wouldn't want to tell you because I know you would oppose me as soon as possible) but I say it only so that you might stop disliking me so much and see that I am a good editor and try my best. I've been catching vandals like crazy and warning and reporting a bunch. I've been making a ton of productive edits all around wikipedia as well. So far I haven't decided if I will accept the adminship nom for a number of reasons, but i'm sure I can expect you to sign under oppose when I do. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 23:55, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I disagree with my "huge summary of incivilities" as I have not been incivil except when I first joined almost a year ago. I don't think I have "disregards for policy," and I think I've made a lot of great contributions to wikipedia. I also notice, despite the fact that you say you have "nothing personal" against me that it has been you that has reported me the last three times or so that I have been reported by anyone. However, despite disagreeing with you (and also my thoughts on how you have edited), I appreciate the hidden compliments buried somewhere in there and I do hope you keep an open mind as you seem to now. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 18:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure you would like where that was going. The guy is a serious idiot, and he's been blocked two or three times for making personal attacks against me already (and I still don't know why he started them). As far as I know I think he started insulting me because I saw him attack someone else on the Metallica talk page and I warned him of WP:CIVIL and also couldn't help but mention he was hard to understand, so he threw a fit. But really, he is hard to understand. He not only spells like a child but the things he says fall into that same category. He has no idea what he's taslking about and is extremely childish. I will also point out I never started anything with him. The last time he attacked me I told him to leave me alone...and he did for a few months then suddenly he vandalizes my user page and another user warns him and...well, you get the picture. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 19:39, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Confused...

Can you clarify this comment please...[1]. Who is this directed at? Cheers Nouse4aname (talk) 10:38, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I assumed that is what you meant, but wasn't certain, I thought possibly you were responding to my response on his talk page (confusing huh?!). Cheers. Nouse4aname (talk) 11:00, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

No worries!

I was just about to let you know about that! It's very confusing that he signs his name as one thing which redirects to a separate user page...shouldn't be allowed really! Cheers Nouse4aname (talk) 11:53, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

That is true. But it has to be this way, otherwise it wouldn't look 'cool', right? ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 11:54, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Ha ha! So true! Nouse4aname (talk) 12:00, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

This is bordering on incivil. And it has nothing to do with being "cool". I saw other users do it and firgured, "what the hell?" This was when I had my normal signature so I decided to alter it as twsx has, but put in a different name than my user name (which is not that confusing...) as another one of my wikifriends had done this and told me how. I hardly care about being "cool," and I'm serious about that. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 19:28, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

You messed up your indent. Fixed it for you. :-) ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 22:27, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I was responding to both of you. "Epic lulz" indeed... Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 22:40, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Why?

why you are reverting all my edits??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nu89 (talk • contribs) 07:32, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Think well, "alternative metal" is even more loosely defined than nu metal, read the article on AMG about alternative metal. If you keep my edit, nu metal will be better defined...

List of nu metal bands / Spineshank

I can't help but disagree with you on the Spineshank issue. Nu-metal is categorized as featuring hip-hop influences, such as rapping and/or deejaying, two elements that Spineshank NEVER implemented in their music. And it says so on their Wiki page because the guy who maintains it is stubborn and won't let me add this statement to their page: "They are categorized as industrial-influenced metal, with some also claiming them to be nu-metal, while others disagree citing the band's lack of deejaying or rapping in their music." I think the point here is that if someone (i.e. ME) disagrees that the band is nu-metal, there should be a "genre disputed" title next to the band. And I doubt that I am the only who sees this. You want a "Typical" nu-metal band? Listen to 3rd Strike, Darwin's Waiting Room, Limp Bizkit, or Linkin Park. Hsxeric (talk) 11:20, 03 May 2008 (UTC)

Not every nu metal band needs to be "rapping". And no, you disagreeing makes no dispute. Genres are a topic heavily fought over. What my or your opinion on the matter is matters relatively little; The de facto ruling is to go with whatever sources say. There are no sources who state they are not nu metal, there are however many sources stating them as nu metal. Please do not revert again without any reasoning. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 11:36, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

True not every nu-metal band needs "rapping" but they need some sort of hip-hop or funk elements, all of which Spineshank lacks. And as for sources, do you really believe everything the media tells you? Especially rock journalists, the worst kind of writers out there?Hsxeric (talk) 11:20, 03 May 2008 (UTC)

You do not seem to understand. What I (or you, or any other individual) alone believe matters not — Opinions differ. You can't write crucial details with someones opinion as validation for its truth. So, what do you do? You either talk about it and reach consensus, or (usually in the lack of consensus) go with what reliable sources say. By this manner of judgement, Spineshank is a nu metal band or at least directly affiliated with the genre. Hence, no dispute. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 19:10, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

You win. Hsxeric (talk) 11:20, 06 May 2008 (UTC)

Lol, you finally wore the poor guy out. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 22:14, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I wrote it. And I wanted to remove it. Get over it. Hsxeric (talk) 11:20, 06 May 2008 (UTC)

Black metal user template

hmm, it seems to work just fine on my computer. I'm using a simple font tag to change the color of those links, but I'll look into it, thanks. = ∫_t^c 5th Eye 01:18, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

oh okay! very cool! thanks a load = ∫_t^c 5th Eye 15:22, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

AGF

Fair enough. ;) Have a nice day! asenine ^{say what?} 18:06, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey

I might actually need your help. I know, inconceivable, right? Anyways, first, what do you think about WP:V? I've seen previously that you seem to be a stickler for it. I just want to know if you approve of it and enforce it. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 18:38, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I generally approve of it, because despite not acting on that instinct, i don't think you can generally trust in people to edit in good faith. While i think there should always be as many references as possible, i don't think each and every statement must be referenced by a source as big as, i.e., a major national newspaper. That's a dream world, as not every subject is covered by the media as huge as some circus attractions like Britney Spears for example are. However, the moment an argument is contended (obviously, i mean REALLY contended, not one random stranger saying "it's so"), a source as good and reliable as possible should be looked for. If none can be found, in most cases i'd rather see the part removed from the article than to use a strange source. So, long story short: Support it, generally yes. Enforce it, generally not so much. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 19:22, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Well I absolutely agree with what you said. Although I do believe it should be enforced more. I'm aware most people don't enforce it, and in fact, it seems to be generally ignored. I'm glad we agree. I may need your support in the future on this issue. I've had some issues with users. I wanted to remove a bunch of incited info that was total crap per WP:POV and WP:V and they kept reverting me. One of the users was saying things like, "You can't blank so much information. We must always think of the users and blanking such information does not help the user when they want to come to this page and learn something." Even if it's wrong? I was aghast. The user was totally misguided. I want to help users, too. But that means I want them to read information that is CORRECT. If there is even a small chance of it being wrong it needs to be removed to prevent misinformation being spread. Anyways, long story short, it seems resloved now, but we'll see, I may need your support on this issue in the future and this is not canvassing, I just might need your support to enforce a policy. Because those users just kept ignoring me and I told them to read WP:V and, well, they ignored me. I, too, wish that everything could be cited with a reliable source. Alas. Anyways, I hope I can count on your help with this issue if it ever arises again. Thanks. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 19:33, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm generally having a hard time getting my self to actually do some work around here (such as searching for reliable publications). But if it's about some fanbois who'd rather introduce their unreferenced version, i'm happy to help. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 19:37, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I hear you. It's definitely easier to delete unreferenced info than to actually search for reliable sources, which is kinda sad, but that's just the way it is. Thanks. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 19:40, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

RFR

Heh, no-one usually has to wait beyond 2 minutes! Probably the longest RFR request I've seen. :) No probs, enjoy rollback and ask if you need assistance. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 14:44, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Albanian joint forces

Hello i see you reverted mine posts at the albanian joint forces i dont know if you saw it but every single thing i added to the weapons had an reference i still dont know why you edited them can you plz explain it to me —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.208.41.37 (talk) 17:10, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Albanian_Joint_Forces_Command&diff=prev&oldid=218663173 - I happen to about know what that means. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 17:11, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Can I has hlep plz?

Hi there old friend. I was wondering if you could give your input on this. I know it's not exactly your type of music, but you have given great feedback on previous debates surrounding the very same band. So, if you happen to find the time, and of course you feel like it, i would greatly appreciate it. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 20:19, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey! :) Thanks for your message, I left a couple comments on the page. Thanks for the initiative, I'm sure the article's stability will benefit from it. By the way, how have you been? It's been a while! Cheers, Zouavman Le Zouave 20:22, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Heya. Thanks for finding the time, should help reaching consensus. Well, i'm alright, busy with work mostly. Also recovering from 9 months of WoW-nerdyness. :) And how are you? ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 21:05, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Happy First Day of Summer!

Happy First Day of Summer!

A Beautiful Summer Field

Summer is a time for freshly grown fruits and vegetables.

Just wishing you a wonderful First Day of Summer 2008! Mifter (talk)







If you live in the Southern Hemisphere and are entering the season of Winter not Summer then I wish you a Happy First Day of Winter 2008!

Give this greeting to others by adding {{subst:First Day of Summer}} on their Talk Page.

Amon Amarth

Hey Twsx; before I say this, let me just note that I really do not wish to start an edit war (or any sort of personal war) against you, as I think you're a good editor. Still, just to clear up the Amon Amarth thing - it wasn't a lie about the line breaks being part of the MoS (I did make use of the word "also", acknowledging that commas are part of the MoS as well), as can be seen in one of the two examples here. ≈ The Haunted Angel 12:25, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I am aware. Nevertheless, that part of the comment was very missleading, giving unaware editors a falsified impression of the policy. Also, the comment was warning users to not do something which is clearly also in support of policy, which would be the reason why i have removed the comment fully. Though, as i am sure you have noticed, i did not and will not touch the formatting of the genre field, so i think this should not be reason for any grudge between us. Even if you consider have considered the possibility of me being a sock puppeteer. :) ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 13:43, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I knew adding your name to that list would give the wrong impression. I never really thought you would be a puppeteer; as I said to Libs, I think you're far more mature than that, as I know you've passed the edit war already. I simply put your name there as this is really where most of the edit warring began (not that I'm implying that it was your fault in any way); but I felt a bit bad having your name there, as it really did seem to give the wrong impression, and so I've removed it. Sorry for bad faith I may have shown! ≈ The Haunted Angel 13:56, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh don't worry, i was only poking. :) ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 14:41, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, that's alright - but I still just want to it clear that I wasn't accusing you of sock puppetry or anything ^_~ ≈ The Haunted Angel 14:58, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Fixing band genre capitalisation

I'm not sure whether it was an action of a bot under your name or your own action, but I've reverted your edit to the Josh Homme article. Genre capitalisation is only a small thing, but through editing all genre's mentioned on the page, you've broken many links to other articles. Notably to Eagles of Death Metal (Or Eagles of Death metal as it became). So be careful in future. Red157(talk • contribs) 13:29, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

The tool lets me review every change before it does it, so i really screwed up. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 16:08, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Opeth genre

I am restoring this page to how it were before some Ip users change, with some cosusions to make both those who whaned prog death and commas in the page. These user changed the page without consenus, therefore I see fit to revert these edits. While I did go overboard, I wish to make an effort so we don't go though a very messy edit war. Johan Rachmaninov (talk) 07:17, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

The state i have reverted to reflects discussion consensus, and is also the state the infobox was in when the article was promoted to featured article status. Please leave it at that. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 08:09, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, This version has only been up for a week, and I can't find any kind of consenus. Of cource, your kind of famous for being a very, fanaticle supporter of commas, so excuse me if I don't take your word for itJohan Rachmaninov (talk) 08:16, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I am not exactly sure if i understand what you are trying to say. You think i support line breaks? Wrong, on the contrary. I just noticed though, that the current version uses commas. Although this is to my liking, it is not how the article used to be the longest time, so i have changed it accordingly. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 13:14, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I ment commas. and I agree with your decision on the article. Johan Rachmaninov (talk) 22:35, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Fixing style of genres

Hi, I see you have been making improvements to lists of genres in articles, but I believe your changes are incomplete. Only the first word in a list should be capitalized. See Template:Infobox Musical artist. As an example:

• Before change: Psychedelic Rock, New Prog, Space Rock
• After your change: Psychedelic rock, New prog, Space Rock
• What it should be: Psychedelic rock, new prog, space rock

Also, I saw you change <br /> to <br/> in places where there shouldn't have been a <br/> in the first place, i.e. at the end of a line. Actually you can just use <br>, the slash isn't required at all, see Wikipedia:Line break handling. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 02:39, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I know about the genre issue. Thing is, my regex skills are not that advanced (i'm using a semi-automated tool to do those changes), that i could make it capitalize the first one, but not the further ones. So, as i seem not to be able to fix it completely, i still think it's an improvement by decapitalizing the words "Metal", "Rock", et cetera. About the line break stuff: I never actually read about it, but i always assumed that all forms of writing the break-tag will be interpreted and output in the same way. Yet, i think it still is in the users service to show them how a proper, valid tag should look like. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 06:39, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. To quote from WP's line break handling guide: "The <br> tag used here is not really HTML markup but 'HTML wikimarkup' that gets interpreted by MediaWiki." In other words, it's not an HTML tag, but a wiki tag that just looks like HTML, and therefore <br> is the correct format. A slash is allowed for compatibility with coders who are used to typing it. So if you want to show users what a proper, valid tag should look like, the tag without the slash is it. ("Proper" isn't universal, it's like having to remember to spell "colour" with a "u" in some articles, and without in others, regardless of which is declared "proper" where you live.) --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 07:17, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Break problem still occurring

PLEASE STOP changing breaks to include a slash, and instead of changing breaks at the end of a line, remove them. [2] See my previous note to you, and please read WP:NOWRAP. There is no point in running a bot if it's making incorrect changes that someone else has to fix. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 01:54, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't exactly see what your problem is.

• <br> <BR> <br/> <br /> etc. seem to be interpreted by MediaWiki in the very same way. Since there is no policy stating which of these is to be used (why would there be), there is no "correct" version. As these wiki markup tags clearly derive from the HTML tag, and, in HTML "<br/>" is the correct version, i change it to that. If it doesn't matter dung here on Wikipedia, why not stick with what is correct outside of Wikipedia? It is however correct that since we are on Wikipedia, that change could be viewed as redundant.
• Bot? What bot?
• None of the changes is, as you state, "incorrect".
• My tool does not introduce any errors. It simply does not fix all problems. I shall improve it somewhen, but who has the time.

Eventhough it's a hard thing to do in those times, i must remind you to assume good faith, and to get your facts straight before charging in on me. Thanks. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 10:57, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry you took it the wrong way; I had no intention of assuming bad faith.

In the previous post you said you are using a semi-automated tool, which I decided to call a bot, but if it's not, then it's not.

Regarding breaks, here is my opinion about it, based on my feelings about good computer habits: <br> is the only form mentioned in the documentation; all others function at present but since they are not documented they could become non-functional in future (a problem which often happens in programming languages, and the use of working but undocumented code is one of the main reasons there is so much browser incompatibility), and so should be avoided. But I can understand your point as well.

As for changes being incorrect, what I meant is that looking at your changes revealed pre-existing breaks at ends of lines, which should have been removed instead of being altered, and changes to capitalization were only being half-done. I'm just concerned that you may not be looking at the changes your semi-automated tool is making, and manually fixing what is being missed. You may not have been aware of what your tool is doing, which is why I posted to you. I don't mind fixing up edits (if you don't mind), but if you are doing a lot of edits with this tool, you could get similar comments from others. You can keep making your changes, and I won't bug you about it further. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 00:34, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Rock music WikiProject

I'd like to invite you to join the newly-formed Rock music WikiProject. There's alot of Rock-related articles on Wikipedia that could use a little attention, and I hope this project can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help us get this project off the ground and a few Rock music pages into the front ranks of Wikipedia articles. Thanks! --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 12:27, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Nu Metal- criticism

I just added a brief criticism section and referenced it to a credible source and, lo and behold, you deleted it. Why? If you'd like I can cite the whole article I used at the beginning of the criticism, not just the exact quote I used, but I'd appreciate it if I can revert back to it without you deleting it again, Twsx.--BRain524 (talk) 20:26, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

There were many attempts to put a well-referenced criticism section before. Just like yours, they were all biased and not referenced. There are discussions on that topic on the talk page. If you can write such a section and not fail at this task, i encourage you to do so. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 21:54, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

First of all, I hardly think an accurate summation of a commonly leveled criticism can be called "biased". Secondly, it WAS referenced!! I cited an article by a professional music critic AND a quote by a knowledgeable expert. Like I said before, I could probably cite the whole article, which also discusses the criticism at length, and not just the quote, but otherwise I don't see what the problem is. I going to revert back to my post and I'll thank you not to delete it.--BRain524 (talk) 23:05, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Continueing discussion at Talk:Nu_metal#Criticism. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 23:40, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Oasis disagreement

Might I suggest looking at my post on the talk page with a number of sources for psychedelic rock, instead of reverting anything by me on sight? It's hard to make edits that have legitimate support, only for them to be reverted and not discussed on the talk page, despite my asking people to. I don't know why you object to the genre, but would like to know. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 16:29, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Your edits are not suppported, but actually opposed by consensus. Can't put it any more simple than that. As the topic already is in disagreement, it is senseless to just keep changing the article to your preferred version again and again. You'd rather strive for consensus on the talk page, and then go with whatever turns up, be it in your favour or not. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 17:32, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

What consensus? I don't see a genre consensus anywhere on the talk page, except that people agree with Rock. I see a lot of people that support alternative rock and a lot of people that are against it. I don't see anyone talking about psychedelic rock, though, like I was. And I certainly don't see a consensus for any issue on any one side. I posted numerous references to the band's music being pyschedelic rock, and I haven't seen this issue touched upon at all so why it should get reverted without people discussing it is baffling to me. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 17:49, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Disturbed source

Care to explain how a published source isn't a reliable source? Prophaniti (talk) 14:14, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I have started a discussion on the matter at Talk:Disturbed#Source_in_infobox. please issue your opinion there. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 15:10, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Your removal of the space in br tags

Since correct XHTML uses the space, there really is no need for you to remove it. Please see [3] and the source of all Wiki pages. Erzsébet Báthory_{(talk|contr.)} 10:36, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

"Since correct XHTML uses the space"

That is not correct. To pass standard XML validation (or, specifically in that context, w3's HTML validator, which may or may not include additional parameters) both versions (with or without a space) are OK, without any warning for either versions. I have yet to see any recommendation to use one of them and not use the other. If there is such a recommendation and I have missed it, please give me a heads-up and tell me where to find it. Given those conditions (if I am correct about them, that is), the space is nothing but redundant, hence, it is removed. Very much looking forward to your response, sincerely, ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 11:41, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Please see these two links, which explains the problem with having no space in there. [4] [5]. Cheers. Erzsébet Báthory_{(talk|contr.)} 11:49, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello. I was not aware of those, thank you. (Eventhough there seems to be no reasoning available as to why the space should be made). I have changed my tools pattern accordingly. This is going to take some time to get used to, though. ;-) ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 11:58, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the very late response

Well, I'll admit I still like line breaks, but I'm inclined to agree with you and we both seem to want to do what's best for this encyclopedia, an encyclopedia that has a tendency to get messed up a lot. Ha! That's great one, and so very very true. But seriously, that page needs to be taken down still. It's a neologism that has no proof except a few music reviewers who have their heads on backwards and talk out of their ass. Music reviewers often have that tendency... Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 16:39, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Peer review request (List of Weeds episodes)

Hello,

I've put List of Weeds episodes up for peer review because I've made a ton of recent and major edits to it in the hope of getting it to FL status and would like the input of others to suggest additions in content (such as if the episode leaks discussed in the main article and the faux talk show Good Morning Agrestic should be included) or make note of errors (if the ratings section needs to be re-written, if the theme song/opening sequence sections need to be extended and if the episode summaries are appropriate).

Thanks, The no erz (talk) 14:51, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of nu metal bands

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is List of nu metal bands. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of nu metal bands (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:28, 26 May 2009 (UTC)