Jump to content

User talk:Hello Control/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MiszaBot III (talk | contribs) at 13:29, 29 March 2008 (Archiving 2 thread(s) from User talk:Hello Control.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Archive 1

Thanks

Thanks for the revert to my bots report page, its much appreciated :) Lloydpick 10:30, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

subject

Request - Hello Hello Talk, My contribution: A Rose for Emily - Discussion Questions. I hope this entry will not be removed again because I certainly believe that this link is useful for wikipedia visitors (especially for students who study American literature) and includes original work. I have difficulty understanding how some contributors delete entries without consulting the contributor. The fact that the link gives access to a blog should not mean that it has no place in wikipedia. The blogger is a university instructor. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Literature2007 (talkcontribs) 07:15, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello Control. You have removed my contributions again. I refuse to contribute to wikipedia again. I think wikipedia is becoming a site of power struggle. You should have examined the content more closely before removing the links. I have explored the questions in my classes and they have worked really well. Anyway, I am not going to waste my time contributing to wikipedia anymore. It can be all yours. Bye. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Literature2007 (talkcontribs) 08:06, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

  • I am sorry to hear that you have given up on Wikipedia so easily. However, since you only seem interested in promoting your blog, we will likely manage to suffer the loss without much pain. (I presume it's your blog because the IP address you initially edited from is at Sabanci University, which is where the owner of that blog is employed, according to the blog's "About" page.) —Hello, Control Hello, Tony 12:59, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Rollback

Hi Hello Control, I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck. Acalamari 22:18, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

use of afd vs. speedy

Given the history of Rey Casas the best way will be to send it to afd -- if the people there agree it is a hoax we can then deal more easily with further re-creation of the article. DGG (talk) 17:46, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: On what planet...

I realize that gender-neutral pronouns may seem awkward, and are not typically found in everyday life for speakers of modern english, however there is legal precedent for their use. In this case, the user complained that references to gender were unnecessarily providing personal information about them. Please see Gender-neutral pronoun. The way that you edited it is also perfectly acceptable. There are many other edits I made that were for the same reason.... check my edit history if you want to go and prettify those edits as well. JERRY talk contribs 22:43, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

  • I understood your edit but it made for a VERY awkward read, almost impenetrable (certainly for the casual reader). I don't think I "prettified" it, I made it legible (I also caught a "her" that you missed). I didn't mean to be rude with my edit summary, although in retrospect I suppose I was. I apologize for clicking "Save page" a little too quickly. —Hello, Control Hello, Tony 02:12, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Young and Restless (hip hop band)

My mistake on the link -- allmusic.com kept crashing Firefox, and I grabbed the wrong URL. I've added the correct links on the talk page, including one showing that they charted. I'll remove the hoax tag again (assuming that's okay with you), and add some refs to the article.--Fabrictramp (talk) 19:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

A.M. (band)

I removed the notability question because there is a sufficient amount of notable sources to verify the band's existence and legitimacy.--Destroy1998 (talk) 22:28, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

DiGiTs (band)

I removed the notability question because, again, there are enough notable sources. I also changed the capitalization because that is the proper way to spell DiGiTs, which is a proper noun.--Destroy1998 (talk) 22:36, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

  • The Wikipedia Manual of Style says that "For proper names and trademarks that are given in mixed or non-capitalization by their owners, follow standard English text formatting and capitalization rules" i.e. capitalize the first letter and the rest are lower-case. As with A.M., I disagree with you regarding notability but will not revert your edit. —Hello, Control Hello, Tony 02:01, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Jorge Ferreira

Good work (in progress...) on Jorge Ferreira! Besides de notability, credibility and others issues of that sort, I do belive that the article is too long. By the way, and of course you can take my statements as my own bias, this Ferreira is almost completely unknown in Portugal. Oh! And 81.65.196.240 has just erased some of your tags. Keep up your good work! Cheers! The Ogre (talk) 07:11, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Yeah, I've been in kind of a "holding pattern" over the long weekend, replacing tags as needed. When I get a longer stretch of time where I can edit (possibly later today), I'm going to start slimming it down and getting rid of the year-by-year entries so it's more in keeping with Wikipedia format. —Hello, Control Hello, Tony 10:17, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Love in This Club

All of the information in the section that I added is true. I work in the industry and - in fact - my radio station was one of those that got hit with a Cease and Desist letter. Jive had no plans to release the record until at least mid-March, prior to Polow Da Don leaking it to the station in Atlanta. But, once he leaked the record, radio began playing it (quite frequently, in a few cases) and Jive had to hurry the release of a mastered version and they moved up the adds date. If you'd like, I can provide you with Mediabase chart statistics and other information to back up the information.

http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r238/rastabolio/SCREENCAP-MEDIABASE-USHERfeatYOUNGJ.jpg

Thanks!--InDeBiz1 (talk) 23:01, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I would challenge the word "research," as used in this instance. It's not as if I'm telling a story about how I think things happened, or should have happened. It is a fact that Jive served C&D letters on this record, due to A) the version of the record that was leaked was an unmastered copy and B) it was well in advance of their plans for this project.
However, the fact of this situation remains that you do have a valid point, but maybe not under the terms that you're presenting it. I will concede that the information, while interesting, may not be all that relevant to anyone reading the article that is not familiar with our industry.
That being said, I would still like to see the information left in the article, BUT I will support whatever decision that you - as the more senior to Wikipedia between the two of us - feel is in the best interests of the article and the encyclopedia as a whole.
Thanks! --InDeBiz1 (talk) 23:21, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
  • I'm not saying that you're interpreting facts here (see WP:OR for what I meant by "original research"). The bottom line is that you're adding information that has not been published in a reliable source thus can't be proven beyond your claim that you saw the C&D notice (again, I'm not saying you're making it up, just that you can't prove it; tangentially, you can only say for certain that your radio station got the C&D notice). This fails WP:V and although you're not reaching a conclusion it's still based on what you know not what you can show. Surely something like this will get a mention soon in Billboard or FMQB or some such industry publication at which point it can be added to the article. Thanks for understanding. —Hello, Control Hello, Tony 00:12, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Okay, I can live with that and support your decision. I would expect to see that information hit a verifiable source sometime in the near future. If it doesn't, oh well, right?  :) --InDeBiz1 (talk) 00:22, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello, CobaltBlueTony™!

I feel like answering every time I see your talk link! - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 20:29, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Fat Joe's Mixtape

Why did you put it up for deletion even after i posted a reference?Y5nthon5a (talk) 21:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Request for comment

Please review Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Loren Chasse and comment, if you care to. Thanks! - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 16:03, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Beyond Austin/Beyond Aston; Doopefish/Dopefish

Thought you might be interested in this. That article needs a speedy. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 21:36, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

;) And so fast! You must have it watchlisted. Peace, delldot talk 05:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Love In this Club

Oh, okay. My bad. Thanks for letting me know. --FSX-2007 (talk) 23:10, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

RE: Ace of Base AfD closure

I suppose you can if like; however, this is an album from a definitively notable band, and it was decided that there was enough verifiable information to discount WP:CRYSTAL. GlassCobra 22:02, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Removed prod from A.WOLF

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from A.WOLF, which you proposed for deletion, because its deletion has previously been contested or viewed as controversial. Proposed deletion is not for controversial deletions. For this reason, it is best not to propose deletion of articles that have previously been de-{{prod}}ed, even by the article creator, or which have previously been listed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article, but feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks!

Addendum: There was an AfD for the article in May of 2006 which it passed. -- Atamachat 20:39, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Boss of all Bosses

Sorry I didnt know. But I really want the arrictle to stay. Piazzajordan2 02:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

PROD removed on Go DJ!

Another editor removed your {{prod}} on Go DJ!. Do you plan on taking this to AfD? If you do, I'll vote to delete. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 05:09, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Yeah, I've been following through with AfDs on all the future-album prods I've been dropping, except when references are added to show notability, which never actually happens. —Hello, Control Hello, Tony 09:06, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Now that I take a look at the improvements, it seems ok for the moment. The references aren't the greatest but aren't unreasonable (and at least they're recent) and a second single just dropped this week. As long as speculation is kept in check, I don't think it's too bad. Of course, if six months from now there's still no scheduled release date, I'll revisit my thinking. —Hello, Control Hello, Tony 13:17, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: The Mirror (album)

No problem. I tend to hold fairly rigorous standards for unreleased albums, but this one is definitely notable. Spellcast (talk) 16:16, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Future albums are fine as long as it's reliably sourced. But unfortunately people tend to add cruft like rumoured tracks. If you want to start a wikiproject, WP:COUNCIL/P would be the place to start. There's no guarantee I'll be deeply involved, but I do support removing unsourced albums when I see them. Spellcast (talk) 20:56, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Unreleased albums

Hi, thanks for the message! I am very interested in cleaning up wikipedia. And removing out of date tags is very much a part of that. I will certainly take a look at the project and remove any out of date tags i find whilst i'm doing my counter vandalism patrolling. Thanks and have a nice day. TheProf | Talk 19:42, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

Regarding the page Eating's Not Cheating (2005), which you tagged for speedy deletion on the basis of it is a recently-created redirect page resulting from an implausible typo or misnomer, I wanted you to know that I have removed the speedy deletion tag. This page does not qualify for speedy deletion because it is not recently-created and has a page history for a merged page which must be preserved for GFDL attribution reasons. If you still want the page to be deleted, please use the WP:RFD process. Thanks! Stifle (talk) (trivial vote) 21:29, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

double album

He said there is over 90 minutes and not much they wanted to cut down, so if that is the case it would have to be a double album if they chose not to cut a lot down.--E tac (talk) 19:49, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

WP:MUSIC proposal

As someone who has previously been involved in WP:MUSIC policy discussion. I would much appreciate your input on this proposal if possible. --neonwhite user page talk 02:34, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Nicole Wray

You recently undid an edit to Nicole Wray remiving an AfD template, with the edit summary "—rv AfD tagging with no follow-through" Since the article is currently listed at AfD, and because it is inappropriate to remove an AfD without it being closed, I have rolled back this edit. -- RoninBK T C 16:13, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

  • That's weird—the editor who placed the tag never opened an AfD. (20 seconds later) OK, I just checked and I see that the AfD was opened by an editor but the tag was placed on the article by an IP; my mistake. I guess it doesn't matter anyway since the AfD was almost immediately closed as a bad-faith nomination. Still, I'll be more careful next time. —Hello, Control Hello, Tony 16:56, 20 March 2008 (UTC)