User talk:Will Lakeman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! In your case, I gather it's going to be more than editing — I hope you'll get to know the workings of Wikipedia soon enough, though I think it would be good to try some article editing anyway for some real community interaction. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump like you did before or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! — mark ✎ 09:57, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks very much, Mark. I'm going to start practisng my editing ASAP, as soon as I find something that I'm sifficiently knowledgeable about Will Lakeman 20:47, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Research

Hi Will (this time via wiki as opposed to email!) - first of all, thanks for the compliment on my repository of links - it's far from exhaustive but somehow I want to connect all the meta-interesting pages together to make navigation through this sprawling network of nodes a little easier - started the research category on meta and will do more when I'm not so busy. There's a real buzz of research on Wikipedia now - I suppose people are flocking to it as a fascinating case study, which I did myself over a year ago - but also from 'insiders' like Anthere and Sj - as per Wikidemia (which I see you've added to) and m:Wikicensus, both of which need some revamping or injecting with energy. On your own tack, it very much overlaps with my own focus - I could go into a long-winded rant mode here, but will wait until your answers come back ;) and send you a draft of a paper I'm writing for Wikimania, which is a pared-down version of my dissertation - are you going to Wikimania yourself? Just to add to your literature, I've tons of readings with very diverse findings/methods - not sure exactly where to send you but keywords like collaboration, constructivism, learning community, identity/presence along with some key names like Jenny Preece, Etienne Wenger (and Sherry Turkle who you mentioned) will work well - assuming you've got an athens account or something to access online journals with - my paper will have most of these. But who am I to tell you what literature review you need? - only you know that! I'll leave it there myself, but would be interested to hear more about your research, which you've done a good job of explaining on your user page - how about methodology? Are you doing interviews? Surveys? Monitoring discussions? ..?? Cormaggio 00:03, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Greetings Will. I read your research objectives and I think you're going to do OK. It's rather interesting how the sociology at Wikipedia has attracted the attention of so many 'outsiders'. I think it's good that you've decided to actually join in on the editing process. So much for objectivity, eh?
I read the Cliffolilli Phantom Authority article on First Monday and I think his quuestion is right on the mark:
Are the mechanisms that allow accumulation of reputation and hence, 
authority distribution, strong enough to guarantee medium-term sustainability, 
and to maintain the sense of trust and identity among members?
To me, the answer is a yes, but it's based more in partially-blind faith and optimizm than in objective science. I think we should attempt to answer him.
Also I like the term meta-discourse to describe the dialog here. A lot of folks are bewildered by the size and complexity of the information and the widely diverse methods of creating and managing it. My own studies relate to the inner-workings of the MediaWiki code and how the social network populates the databases, organizes the content and ourselves. I'ld like to discuss it further over at Wikidemia. I think the topic will be "Is the term 'community' worn out?" see you there.
Oh by the way I have a cousin that is a drum and bass artist who may be joining Wikipedia soon. He will doubtless find you quickly I should think. Quinobi 04:03, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] DnB crew

As per your comment on the Grooverider talk page, I am here to join your DnB clean up crew, lets discuss this!

Ooops, i forgot to sign my name Themindset 15:55, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

So yeah, I'm interested in doing some clean up along with you... one thing that really bugs me is how bad the Jungle music article is. I'd like to just redirect to the Drum and Bass article, as I feel that any distinction between the two terms has ceased to exist (most DnB artists will tell you the two terms refer to the same thing). What do you think about that? Themindset 15:55, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

I agree that the distinction is largely meaningless. However, the regularity with which the debate appears on dnb forums and other areas suggests that a lot of people perceive it as a real distinction. I've heard a lot of theories put about, which mainly seem to result from the expansion of production styles following the Blue Note era. ie. many people believe Jungle is a sub-genre of drum and bass, which would probably suggest that it requires a sub-genre page like Neurofunk (an article which could also do with some work) or Drill n bass (a subgenre that I find personally ridiculous as, to my knowledge, nobody as ever applied this term to their own music)
I think that much of the debate surrounding teh Wikipedia refers to classification as much as anything else, so I would propose cleaning, shortening the jungle article and having it state that many people consider ita sub-genre of drum and bass (controversially or not). I will take a look at the article over the next few days and put some notes on the talk page. Thanks. illWill 19:47, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
I agree that the current jungle article is pretty shocking! It's certainly particularly awful that the current article doesnt mention dnb until the second paragraph. The link between the two (arguable equivalence) should be unmissably clear. But, I'm not sure that simply redirecting it to the dnb page is the way forward, though? Whether or not jungle and dnb are just synonyms is still a contentious issue, and I personally get the impression that doing this would in-effect be endorsing one POV via the structure of Wikipedia, rather than covering it in the text itself.
(Disclaimer: I wrote the current paragraph covering the jungle/dnb semantic distinction on the drum and bass article.) My idea might be to be to kick off the jungle article with a simple paragraph along these lines. Ie, saying "some/many consider the two to be completely synonymous. So, for this usage of the word jungle, rather than describe it twice, (badly), please just go to the dnb article. On the other hand, some consider jungle to have the following different definitions..." Then coverage of jungle-as-a-subgenre theory, jungle-as-a-forerunner theory, etc. Stevekeiretsu 18:17, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Ola! On board! Something I found the other day which may be relevant to this effort: Wikipedia:WikiProject#Visual_and_performing_arts_and_music I don't know whether this is something worth doing / best done within the 'official' frameworks here, or just on talk pages. I personally suspect the latter? Probably not big enough to merit a 'project'? Don't really know - I'm quite a n00b here :)

As for a to-do list... it would be quicker to make a no-need-to-do list! To be honest, there aren't really any dnb related articles I've seen that couldn't use improvement.

One final thing I'd like to throw in, is categories. I think it would be good to have a "dnb artist" category? At the moment I'm just putting them into "Electronic Musicians" but that's such a massive category, I consider it totally unhelpful. It covers everyone from Luciano Berio to Aphex Twin via Vangelis and Sash!, for heavens sake. I say "artist", btw, since "musician" is usually innaccurate/innappropriate, "DJ" equally so, and "producer" little better - most people we'd be tagging this way are all three.

To be honest this is something that really goes for all Wikipedia. It displays a fundamental lack of understanding of how dance/dj/electronic music operates. Any multiple-member outfits like Orbital get listed as Orbital (band), and any time you see something like "Optical is a DJ and producer" - the producer link is rubbish, and gives totally the wrong impression of what you mean by the word. It only outlines the Quincy Jones / George Martin sense of the word, and doesnt cover the "solo composer, engineer, musician, programmer, producer, mixer" role of dance music at all.

Sorry... starting to ramble... that'll do for now Stevekeiretsu 18:17, 26 May 2005 (UTC)


Well, I pretty much wiped out Jungle music and replaced it with the semantic distinction paragraph from the Drum n Bass article, rather than simply making it a redirect. What do you think? Themindset 21:00, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Good idea, a might add a few little bits to it (maybe about the supposed racist connotations of the world jungle, and the word junglist), but otherwise I think shorter is better. illWill 21:05, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

On the origins of the word jungle, see: http://www.dnbscene.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?t=8927&start=15
Interesting, I'd forgotten about teh Kingston connection. Concrete Jungle. And that guy Duffy lives in the same town as me too. illWill 21:47, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Jumping into an argument as I've found myself here - Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums and Wikiportal/Music is probably what you want. Secretlondon 06:12, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I've just noticed that Konflict has been deleted because the artist is "non-notable" and "probably vanity". This is even after I cleaned up the article somewhat and made it unmistakably plain that they are considered one of the leading lights in techstep with a series of tunes in the late 1990s which are amongst the biggest anthems from that period. This makes me seriously question the point of bothering with this effort. What is the point of putting in my time writing and editing dnb-related articles if admins with evidently ZERO knowledge of drum'n'bass are going to come along, make a (laughably incorrect) judgement about them being non-notable, and delete them altogether?! It's an absolute joke. See: Talk:Konflict Stevekeiretsu 00:04, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Participant observer, Wiki, and academia

Hi, There is nothing wrong with being a scholarly participant observer here at Wiki, as long as someplace you post a note that you are doing an academic study. On your main User page is a good place to post a note. However to start out a discussion comment by invoking your scholarly status as a researcher; and then make a POV comment about text, is in my view outside the bounds of appropriate Wiki behaviour. Here editors range from folks with post-doctorates to folks without formal education. What matters is good editing and following the rules for citation and support for text being added. As you can probably figure out, just adding a comment on a discussion page that you think an article needs work is generally considered a waste of everyone's time. The point is to edit text. Or as others here often say--"we are writing an encyclopedia, not talking about how to write an encyclopedia." If the latter interests you, there are discussions policy and writing rules elsewhere on Wiki and on discussion lists. Happy editing. --Cberlet 13:36, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Researching with...

I don't know if you've had a look at Wikipedia:Researching with Wikipedia (mostly written by Dan Keshet and myself). Not exactly your topic, but 3 things: (1) It won't surprise me if you have something to add to it. (2) You will notice that we've discussed in some measure how this differs from a normal reference work, and how a lot of its strengths come more from the potential to engage in dialogue with the authors than from the content as such. (3) Also, we argue for the importance of the transparent apparatus surrounding an article (history and talk, in particular, but also internal links, ability to see what else was written by the same people, etc.) as part of how one can judge the credibility of an article. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:37, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

Pear Tree House - there has never been a photo. I will go one weekend up to Crystal Palace and get some, I promise ;) Secretlondon 05:36, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Suicide Bombing

Hey Will. To find out what Shahada means, all you have to do is click on the blue link to Shahadah (or Shahada, it's just an alt spelling of the same word). You read about it elsewhere Here, Here or here.
Here it is on those known Islamists, the CIA's website. ( It says, speaking of the Saudi Flag, "green, a traditional color in Islamic flags, with the Shahada or Muslim creed in large white Arabic script (translated as "There is no god but God; Muhammad is the Messenger of God") above a white horizontal saber (the tip points to the hoist side)" ). Islam 101 says ""There is none worthy of worship except God and Muhammad is the messenger of God." This declaration of faith is called the Shahadah, a simple formula that all the faithful pronounce. The significance of this declaration is the belief that the only purpose of life is to serve and obey God, and this is achieved through the teachings and practices of the Last Prophet, Muhammad." --Irishpunktom\talk 08:11, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
The other well known Islamist group, the Anti-Defamation League are quoted as stating "The Anti-Defamation League is respectful of the Shahada, the Muslim Declaration of Faith, which is expressed by millions of Muslims around the world". [1] <- That Link is from a blog entry which deals, to some degree, with the topic at hand, so worth a read! --Irishpunktom\talk 08:33, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
Our problem is actually dealt with on the ADL page;


Tensions flared between American Muslims and the Jewish organization after the ADL issued a June 18, 2004 news release [2] about University of California, Ivine (UCI) students' decision to wear green stoles bearing the Shahada, the Islamic declaration of faith, because suicide bombers connected to the Palestinian group Hamas wear green armbands and headbands inscribed with the Shahada as a symbol of their movement. The news release stated: "The Shahada has come to represent, in radical Muslim circles, support for martyrdom and terrorist groups."
In response to the ADL's comments, Sabiha Khan of the Council on American-Islamic Relations said:

The ADL's hate-filled Islamophobic rhetoric labels all Muslims as terrorists, because every Muslim believes in the declaration of faith as the essence of Islam. It is truly sad that an organization that once fought for religious tolerance has sunk to exploiting anti-Muslim ignorance and prejudice to advance the brutal agenda of a foreign nation. [3]

The ADL released a statement of clarity and offered an apology "to those who took offense." [4] CAIR acknowledged ADL's apology with a statement expressing hope that the "apology represents a change of heart on the part of the ADL." [5]

--Irishpunktom\talk 08:38, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

I think your analysis is correct, and your version is fine, Will, but I only get 3 reverts a day, like everyone else. Jayjg (talk) 22:50, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ultimately you have to request page protection, at WP:RFPP. I can't protect it myself, as I've been involved in recently editing the page. Jayjg (talk) 22:59, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

No, you need to request page protection (WP:RFPP), not arbitration. Page protection usually takes a couple of hours, arbitration takes a couple of months. I don't think you want to wait that long. :-) Jayjg (talk) 23:38, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

No, articles are typically protected on m:The Wrong Version. Jayjg (talk) 13:21, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Suicide bombing

Thanks, Will. The problem is that there's not enough evidence to show who it is. I can block the IP addresses for 3RR, and I'll do that now. I'm assume it's whoever is operating ElKabong/Enviroknot, but I can't be sure. SlimVirgin (talk) 23:43, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

Nothing's to stop them. That's why this has become such a problem: KaintheScion, ElKabong, Enviroknot, and various anon IPs, including open proxies, pretending to the Muslim woman and others. It's almost certainly all the same person. SlimVirgin (talk) 00:14, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I've removed all of the NPOVing and whitewashing, though I have no doubt this justifier of suicide bombings and civilian killings will be back for more POVing soon enough. Jayjg (talk) 4 July 2005 15:11 (UTC)

[edit] re: Beef (music)

There's already a big article on hip-hop "beefs", at Hip hop rivalries. I say make this page redirect to that one, and we can add on to what's already there.--FuriousFreddy 21:51, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Funding for Peace Coalition (eufunding.org)

For someone concerned with fact - you have made some interesting assertions. [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Suicide_bombing#POV_Edits ] Here are some facts.

Funding for Peace Coalition ( www.eufunding.org ) is not an Israel advocacy group, and has no connection with Honest Reporting, although they have quoted us once or twice I believe. Members of the FPC include people of all regions, and religions. The FPC has Israeli & Palestinian members. Europeans & Americans & Australians & Japanese & Canadians. And others. It is all voluntary. Membership is free & the organisation has NO resources, even the few dollars a year for web hosting is donated. It shares a POB with a company that gives it free use of the facility - although the owner is not active in the FPC. The concern of the FPC is a fair deal for the Palestinian people - which its own leadership, aided and abetted by the EU and others, have denied them. The Israeli captured documents that the FPC references are all public domain. The fact that the IDF captured them does not make them false - it only makes them accessible. All facts are referenced to allow easy checking.

This is my first use of wikipedia tools - so I hope that this gets to you.

Brad Nielson Funding for Peace Coalition brad.nielson@eufunding.org

I have replied to this comment on the Talk Page of Suicide Bombing as it has also been posted there. illWill 20:09, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Poll at Talk:Terrorism

I've put together a little poll at Talk:Terrorism regarding the "lone wolf" section. Your input would be appreciated. Thx. Jayjg (talk) 19:42, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for commenting, but you didn't actually vote... Jayjg (talk) 21:29, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
sorry about that - it's the first time I've posted in a poll here - I didn't realise that's waht the sectins meant.illWill 21:47, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Dean and Mineo articles

Would you please consider editing the James Dean and Sal Mineo articles according to your comments on the former's talk page? Thanks. Wyss 5 July 2005 09:51 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Greetings

Hi Will, thanks for your note. My research is doing okay but really must begin again afresh in earnest with little time left, and under a month to Wikimania. Shame you can't make it - it promises to be very interesting - but you can be sure there will be another. I've put up my paper on Wikibooks but it's still very much in draft form. Also, I really should have mentioned this to you before, but have you heard of the Wikimedia research team/network? It's been going for a month or so and looking good. I haven't participated much so far but there's an IRC meeting this Sunday if you're interested. The main page is here. Cheers. Cormaggio 8 July 2005 23:38 (UTC)

[edit] Celebrations of the September 11, 2001 attacks

I honestly don't know what to do with that one. I'd be tempted to merge it into some other article, except that it's probably too long for that; for me, it doesn't seem quite notable enough to justify the trouble of watching over it and fixing it up. You could maybe post a request for comment on Wikipedia:Notice board for Palestine-related topics. - Mustafaa 23:36, 9 July 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Collusion

What's certain is that these men colluded with paramilitaries; you have inserted a claim that they were unauthorised. Can you back that up?

Lapsed Pacifist 11:15, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Take a closer look; I have'nt claimed they were authorised. Wikipedia is not making any claims, unsabstantiated or otherwise. It is stating the facts. See Stevens Report.

Lapsed Pacifist 11:25, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

I've been away for a day or two. You might like to have a look at the recent changes made to Irish Republican Army and Military occupation. Philip Baird Shearer 10:28, 16 July 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Zionazi

You wrote that criticism of Zionism no matter how outlandish is not antisemitism, which is hotly disputed, especially when it is used interchangibly with Jews. I have provided a second link which shows that it is. Finally, New anti-Semitism shows that outlandish criticism of Zionism or comparing Israel to Nazis does constitute antisemitism.

Guy Montag 19:41, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

I'll accept the new version you have created.

Guy Montag 19:53, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Will, although the dispute is over, I have to point out that nowhere did I say that any criticism of Zionism constitutes antisemitism, I said vitriolic comparisons between Jews Nazis and Israel constitutes anti semitism.

Guy Montag 20:54, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

It could also be motivated by malicious hatred, but I think we understand each other on this issue, so I will not push the subject further.

Regards,

Guy Montag 21:19, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hey hey

Hello, I'm replying to a message you left agessssssssssssssssss ago [6] I was going to reply to it earlier, but I was going away.. and then I forgot.. and well, you know how it goes.. well maybe you don't, but anyway.. sorry about that. Regarding the talk Page, amd israel-Palestine related info I have always tried to maintian a NPOV but shortened stance. You can check through the history of the page to find out what I mean. NPOV, for me, comes before Shortness. There are editors, and yes Guy Montag is one of them, and so too is Jayjg, who edit to a Pro-israel POV, again you can check the history of the page to see what I mean. My edits reegarding Israel are usually to NPOV an existing edit, such as removing the word terrorist and replacing it with Militant, etc. Again, sorry about the delay. --Irishpunktom\talk 20:30, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Media bias

Moves, mergers, improvements...Media bias needs some real work. You mention Chomsky and Bagdikian, two favorites of mine, however, I'm only here to be neutral as I'm sure you are. I added some tages and put in some organizational tools/suggestion on the article. I'm also working on two projects -- Wikipedia:WikiProject_Media and Wikipedia:WikiProject_Journalism, maybe you can have a look at those if you have time. Thanks for the note, maybe we'll end up co-editing on some articles. Best, Calicocat 04:31, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Got it

Hi - just read your message this afternoon - will respond soon! Thanks!! Ramallite (talk) 17:18, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] List of political epithets

Thanks for the links, however I don't think it will help. He seems to think that if you are called a self-hating Jew then you are a self-hating Jew. Since it's impossible to prove that they don't hate themselves I think he will keep insisting that they do hate themselves. // Liftarn

Please don't make strawman arguments for me; my response had nothing to do with your distortion above. Jayjg (talk) 03:16, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] New articles

Hello there. I'm going to create a separate article on Media bias in the United States (hopefully the first of a series - I might also start one on Media bias in the United Kingdom) and move most of the merged material there. I'm of the opinion that the main article should have more material about the history of media bias related to the rise of global mass media, and also the effects of the consolidation of media ownership on media bias. {snip...]

I think that sounds like a good idea. I've been working a good bit on Plame affiar and I just did some rewriting on Advocacy journalism. There are also two WikiProtects you might want to take a look at, {Wikepedia:WikiProject Journalism]] and Wikipedia:WikiProject Media, both are new projects that need some editors.

Also, this is off-topic, but have you read "PR" by Stuart Ewen? It's an excellent study of the role of public relations in media bias. I'd recommend it to anybody that likes the propaganda model stuff and Ben Bagdikian. The section on the attck on Roosevelt's New Deal is fascinating

No, I've not read that, but I'll look it up. It sounds interesting, put it in the Bibliography.

Thanks for the note and I'll take a look at the articles and perhaps be able to make some useful contributions. My best, Calicocat 16:54, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] checking in

Hi Will,

I was just checking in to say that I've not found time to get back to the media bias articles we were discussing, but hope maybe you have. If you do draft any, please also add them to the Project list of articles for either the Media project or the Journalism project. Cheers, Calicocat 06:27, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] List of political epithets

Actually the war has calmed down, and when someone outside the war adds a compromise it often sticks. You could always give it a try. Jayjg (talk) 00:09, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

What??? You took me seriously??? Oooh, I'm gonna have to revert you for sure now. ;-) Jayjg (talk) 20:52, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Hip-hop vandalism

Betwee that article, Michael Jackson, hip hop music, and gangsta rap, I wish Wikpedia were members-only sometimes. I'm looking out for it. BTW, I'm having a bit of an issue over at Wikipedia: Categories for deletion: I found a Category:Rap filled with six articles (all of which belong elsewhere), and put it up for deletion, or at the least, leaving it open with a note not to populate it and to fill the hip hop category instead. The users, who all apparently think "rap" and "hip-hop" are two differen things (some, I have learned, think R&B is a subset of hip-hop), want t keep it pen and populate it...but with what?? What would go in Category:Rap that wouldn't or shouldn't go properly under Category:Hip hop. (this discounts the subjective "distinction hip-hop heads often make between what they consider "rap"--wack commerical records--and what they consider "hip hop"--more underground based stuff. It's all hip-hop...even if some of it is a little less consious than the rest). --FuriousFreddy 15:47, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Suicide bombing article

Thanks for your note. Perhaps I shouldn't have removed some text without proper explanation. Currently the paragraph contains some factual errors and severe POV: I don't think it is right to povide HAMAS with a soapbox (at least without critical encyclopedic analisys). I will bring my edits to talk bit by bit, let's both try to be constructive and avoid sweeping reverts in the future. I believe our common goal is to improve WP according to WP:5P. Thanks. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 10:06, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Improoved format

i think i improoved the format of the article oin quesion, tell me ifyou agree. its the content that i find upsettingGavin the Chosen 12:07, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] re: the anon @ hip hop

He/she's been listed at Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress. Hopefully, this should lead to a resolution. --FuriousFreddy 18:13, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Pardon the indiscretion,

Mr. Lakeman, but what is "a healthy cynicism towards authority figures, organisations and media from every part of the political spectrum"? --VKokielov 16:27, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

As opposed to the masses? ;) You understand, of course, that you needn't be a cynic even if you aren't naive? It surprises me how often in the West this perception of the world, which should be a given, becomes a coveted philosophy among the intelligent. I guess it's America's fault, with her sudden, unmuffled jump from a culture of naivete to a culture of cynicism...;) (I mean the sixties). --VKokielov 17:45, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
So you aren't bitter? --VKokielov 18:17, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
Let's not argue definitions. That's all I wanted to know. Thank you. --VKokielov 18:43, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Drum and bass cleanup

Wow, that was a fast response! I will most certainly join that WikiProject once its's founded. As for wikimarkup/template details, I'm pretty proficient in these fields (I presently try to get back to article editing after a long stint at the WP:WSS). Due to this background, I'm also big on categorisation, which is also something that is necessary here. By the way, DnB articles created or heavily expanded by me include Photek, Breakbeat Era and Dom and Roland - though I'm not saying that I'm really satisfied with them ;) See you at the Project (or somewhere else) and happy editing. -- grm_wnr Esc 00:33, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikimania

Hi

I fear I never wrote any full paper on the topic ... and doubt I will actually. If you wish, I can send you by mail my presentation (ppt) - I do not think they have been uploaded yet. Oral presentation is recorded here : http://www.knams.wikimedia.org/wikimania/ (I am FD1). Tell me if you wish the ppt. Good luck Anthere

[edit] RE: Media bias

See reply on my talk page: User_talk:Ambush_Commander#Media_bias. — Ambush Commander(Talk) 19:41, August 16, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Coqsportif

User:Coqsportif has been under watch since joining; he's an obvious sockpuppet, and a disruptive troll. If we're in agreement concerning the Jewish section of self-hatred, I'll work with that consensus in mind. Are you Jewish also, or just fortunate enough to end up editing such a POV-magnet of a page? ;) Shem(talk) 23:49, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] User:Liftarn at List of political epithets

I have run into what I consider disruptive behaviour and WP:POINT at List of political epithets. In my view, User:Liftarn has been removing material and asking for citations for material which has already been cited, and has been insisting on citations exclusively for, and inserting NPOV notices in, Jewish-related epithets, when no citations have been provided for any of the other epithets on the page, and when he has raised no specific objections in Talk:. Could you possibly take a look? Jayjg (talk) 15:49, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

I have actually not removed anything, it's just commented away awaiting citations (real ones, not invented). As Jayjg is pushing his POV in those areas it's ofcourse those areas that get attention for NPOVing. It should be noted that who first started requiering citations for everything was Jayjg. // Liftarn

[edit] merging Jungle music with Drum and bass

Please come and check out the discussion over at the Drum and bass article, we are finally discussing merging with Jungle music. I know that you are somewhat undecided, but as many voices as possible need to be heard. I suspect you've been away for a while, if so, pls come check it out when you're back. Cheers mate! Themindset 11:05, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Neurofunk origins and artists

There are two different points of view about the neurofunk subgenre of drum'n'bass. The first is that neurofunk was originated by the Audio Blueprint label. According to this point of view, neurofunk artists are Stakka & Skynet, Teebee, Photek, Black Sun Empire, Gridlok, etc. The second is that neurofunk was originated by Ed Rush and Optical (Virus Recordings label), and that other artists are Cause 4 Concern, Mayhem, Noisia, Phace, Matrix, etc. Please cite sources on the neurofunk talk page to support any arguments. — Anrie Nord 2006-01-31 15:31Z

[edit] french student looking for help...

Hello Will ! First please excuse my english, it really needs some improvement... My name is Sylvain and I'm a graduate student in political tought in the university of Lyon, France. I'd like to do my MA thesis on Wikipedia, and to study its philosophical and political grounds, and maybe its power structure. Your work sounds very interesting and I'd like to throw an eye on it, could it be possible?

I hope your studies are going well ! :) All Best,


Sylvain


P.S. : You can contact me at my discussion page or at lekaribou@gmail.com

[edit] List of noteworthy raves

This is up for AFD here. As you were involved in the discussions to create this I thought you should be notified. Rex the first talk | contribs 00:44, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/i/l/User_talk%7EWill_Lakeman_d77f.html"