User talk:Hoponpop69
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Welcome to Wikipedia
Welcome!
Hello, Hoponpop69, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}}
on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -- Chet nc contribstalk 18:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for experimenting with the page Lake Titicaca on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. -- Chet nc contribstalk 18:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
You have been blocked from editing for violating Wikipedia policy against vandalism. To contest this block, please reply here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock}} along with the reason you believe the block is unjustified, or email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list.
Note to sysops: Unblocking yourself should almost never be done. If you disagree with the block, contact another administrator. - Darwinek 18:42, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
{{unblock}}This is unjust and unfair, the category that I made was in no way vandalism! I would like to appeal this banning. My categorie was intended for a way for people to find silly names that they might find humorous, and is much more relevant than other categories such as "living people". Alos if you look into my history you can tell that I am not a vandaliser, and have made amny positive contributions to various pages.
[edit] Lake Titicaca
Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Lake Titicaca. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox.
Also, technically, you may be in violation of Wikipedia's three revert rule. Please, if you haven't done so, undo your reverts to the article to avoid disciplinary action. -- Chet nc contribstalk 18:45, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Mark Kennedy
Andjam 01:18, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- Please use an edit summary, especially about a section that's the subject of contention. Thanks, Andjam 00:29, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Elliott Smith
Hello, please refrain from taking "Rock" out of Smith's genre's. Rock is a broad category that easily encompasses songs of Smith's such as "Son of Sam", "A Question Mark", "LA", "Shooting Star" and he even had an unreleased track called "Some (Rock) Song". DO NOT take this genre out again without putting forth a good rationale on the talk page and reaching consensus with the other editors of this article who recently brought it to Featured status. I could even dig up a quote from Smith stating that people often forgot that he still enjoyed playing "Rock" songs in his solo career. OK? - Phorque 11:07, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] High Pitch Eric
Thanks for your work on the High Pitch Eric article. I think the article has been improved, but it still lacks sources and a formal tone. Please don't remove those tags until we fix the problems. --Bill.matthews 03:07, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Playboy
Thank you for contributing to the article on Playboy magazine. I reverted the edit though because of the consensus that has been reached on the talk page regarding adding celebrities to the list in the article. Dismas|(talk) 17:58, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- Hi. Thanks for partially reverting vandalism on my userpage, and I'm sorry you got warned for it. If Patstuart would actually look at the diffs, he would see that you weren't vandalizing. --Michael WhiteT·C 13:39, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Your edits to User:Deathrocker
Thank you for removing the content you added yourself. However, please don't repeat this kind of action in the future; it could be interpereted as a personal attack. If you are having a dispute with this user, try sorting it out on an appropriate talk page. Thanks, Dar-Ape 17:26, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a user's page, as you did with User:Deathrocker, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Irongargoyle 20:01, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Do not vandalise my talk archive genius, you have been warned four times already regarding this, writing "fucking asshole"[1] falls under a personal attack, you will be reported and banned. -Deathrocker 23:24, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Personal attack warning
With regards to your comments on Aiden: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. "Do not make personal attacks anywhere in Wikipedia. Comment on content, not on the contributor. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users." Please keep this in mind while editing. Thanks. Gwernol 20:12, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] [2]
Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by administrators or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 21:45, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Thank You
Thanks for your contribution to Tré Cool, you did a really great job.--Jude 07:11, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Stop
Please refrain from deleting an entire page of info on the RHCP article. I have been, and will continue to, revert your deletion. If you decide to persist, this matter will be taken up with higher authority. NSR77 19:56, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
Jack Sherman did not form the Band. He merely was the chosen guitarist. He had no say in whether or not the band came-together. NSR77 23:15, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
It is also suffice to say that informing the reader the band was formed in Los Angeles is worthy of remaining. I made a few touch-ups to my intro paragraphs to 'suit your needs'.
[edit] Green Day versus Sweet Children
You're alterations to the Green Day page have all been obvious improvements. I can explain the specific alterations I made to the language of the history easily enough, but my substantiating it is another matter.
There is a general assumption (partially a natural conclusion and partially due to misinformation) that Green Day began as Sweet Children. In fact, Sweet Children was not a band in the sense that Green Day was. They did not record. they did not tour. They performed only nominally and they had only two regular members. John Kiffmeyer was never a part of this supposed band. A fact lost to time was that Kiffmeyer was the original front man for Green Day. He brought the connections to the punk scene. He handled all the business. The original mailing address for the band was John's El Sobrante home address. It was his band and he was in charge of it. Billie alludes to as much in an interview with Larry Livermore. Kiffmeyer formed Green Day when he and Jason Beebout (now of SamIam) had an ugly falling out (as is typically the case, over a girl) which led to the break up of their band, Isocracy. After this fiasco, he wanted a band that he could control. My knowledge in this matter is based on first hand personal experience as I was present in Rodeo for the early Sweet Children days, and at Contra Costa College during the break up of Isocracy and the formation of Green Day.
So I assume you would see why this is difficult for me to substantiate. Very little of that early history is recorded. Because of this, I have endeavored to keep the language unspecific, and leave out the majority of "original research". This is why the version you altered specifically avoided mentioning that the two bands were not the same, yet also avoided any confirmation that they were. It was a middle ground, met through trial and error. personally, I would prefer reverting the paragraph back to what it was. It avoids the dissemination of what I know is misinformation, without resorting to what is arguably non-verifiable. Your call at this stage.Theplanetsaturn 23:32, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- On the Billie Joe Armstrong page, You asked: "Does this wording work better for you?" Yes it does. And I thank you for your patience and consideration on this.Theplanetsaturn 18:48, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Once again
You need to realize that I have attempted to fit your needs. You are making revisions that are not correct. Jack Irons did not form the band along with Anthony, Flea and Hillel. None of them are Point of Views, as I am taking every single aspect from Scar Tissue. I took out any minor hints of PoVs that might have remained.
You also need to stop reverting every single edit I make to your incorrect information. Now.NSR77 01:31, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
That's why I took it out. :)
[edit] Mantown
This is the only warning you will receive.
Your recent vandalism to Mantown will not be tolerated. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. —Wknight94 (talk) 22:47, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Alt Press
I am curious about your change to the Alternative Press article. You removed the quote and said it was advertising. I will admit the "In the words of the magazine:" was a bit much and was put in after I fixed the quote. I do not however think it is adgvertizing and am tempted to put it back. No where does it say "Call 1-800-###-#### to subscribe for $9.99". It gives a fairly accurate history and makes the article MUCH more neutral when it is openly attack right under it in the critisms section. No one takes out ""Fair and Balanced" and "The Most Powerful Name in News" from Fox News because the news source speaks highly of itself. Dark jedi requiem 05:41, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
- Maybe what's best is to move it to the talk page, and have people discuss it for a while there, and than decide? Dark jedi requiem 06:06, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Edits to punk rock
I dismissed it as vandalism at first, but as it's you I may have been wrong. You edited the lead paragraph on the punk rock article to give the article a US-centric bias, belittling the role of the UK and totally removing the role of Australia in the formation of punk rock, which went against both consensus and the cited sources (oe of which you removed). Any reason, or was it a mistake, or was it vandalism after all? --Switch 09:15, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
- As the person who added the reference in question I would also be interested in hearing the answer. Grant65 | Talk 12:08, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Improper use of book cover in Green Day
Hi, Hoponpop69. Book covers like Image:Greendaybook.jpg should only be used "to illustrate an article discussing the book in question". Using Image:Greendaybook.jpg as the main image of the article on Green Day goes against this rule. And adding a line of text about the book doesn't chages it.
Please note that book covers are copyrighted images and we can't use them for anything we want just because they are "better" than what we currently have. Wikipedia takes copyright issues very seriously.
Also, as Wikipedia's goal is to create free content, the use of unfree (copyrighted) material is very restricted here. For instance, our policy on unfree material, called WP:FUC, says that we can only use unfree material when "no free equivalent is available or could be created that would adequately give the same information". For an image of the band Green Day, some free alternatives already exists and others could obviously be created (someone could take pictures in a show). So, for the matter, we can't use unfree material (like book covers) at all on the Green Day article.
I'm removing the book cover image once more and I expect you not to reinsert it again.
If you still have any doubts, just drop me a note. Best regards, --Abu Badali 21:20, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Your recent edits to Jerry Seinfeld
This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. —B33R Talk • Contribs 13:05, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Cockshiner
Please do not make personal attacks on other people as you did at Cockshiner. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create such pages will be blocked from editing by administrators or banned by the arbitration committee. Thank you. —Wknight94 (talk) 15:14, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] License tagging for Image:Pnatreeatoppsy.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Pnatreeatoppsy.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 01:14, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject The Offspring
Hello. Would you be intrested in joining a new project I just created? If so, just go directly here. I am also looking for other members who would like to join, even when they like punk rock or that they are just a musician. Alex 02:09, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Greendaypublicityphoto.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Greendaypublicityphoto.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:19, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Normmacdonald.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Normmacdonald.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Yamla 16:19, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to Michael Jackson, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --AshadeofgreyTalk 16:37, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Personal attacks
It is important to keep a cool head, especially when responding to comments against you or your edits. Personal attacks and disruptive comments only escalate a situation; please keep calm and remember that action can be taken against other parties if necessary. Attacking another user back can only satisfy trolls or anger contributors and leads to general bad feeling. Please try to remain civil with your comments. Thanks! --FreeKresge 16:57, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
You have been temporarily blocked from editing for disrupting Wikipedia by making personal attacks. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. --Nlu (talk) 17:09, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] WP:FU violation
WP:FU prevents us from using a fair-use image solely to depict a living person even if we have no readily available replacement. I've already pointed you at this policy page but you violated it again today with your edit to Norm MacDonald. Please take the time to read this policy before making future such edits. Continuing to violate Wikipedia policy may be grounds for a block. --Yamla 23:39, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
You said: "I'm kind of confused, I thought that because it was an album cover, it was clearly stated that it was okay. What am I missing? Thank you."
- No, an album cover may only be used to depict the album. We are not permitted to use fair-use images at all to depict living people, as per WP:FU. So we aren't even permitted to use copyrighted promotional images of that person to depict them (unless the image is released under the CC or GFDL or some such). --Yamla 00:27, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] More fair use problems
I have deleted Image:Timmurray.jpg as you had tagged it as a TV station logo, which is clearly an incorrect fair use tag. Please try to be more careful in selecting appropriate tags for images you upload. Thanks, Gwernol 23:54, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- Ok, but please don't use this image on the Tim Murray article. This image may only be used to illustrate an article about the TV program that this is taken from. Gwernol 00:03, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
- That image can't be used on the Clay Aiken article. I've removed it. Thanks for pointing that out. Gwernol 00:14, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] California punk scene
Just thought I'd pop by to say well done for this article. Very good. I'm currently working through the Fat Wreck Chords cat to get all the album articles up. Bubba hotep 09:41, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Trecoolphoto2.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Trecoolphoto2.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:
- Go to the image description page and edit it to add
{{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template. - On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.
Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Chowbok ☠ 17:34, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Blocked
Please do not make personal attacks on other people as you did at Fat fuck. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. .
Even though you created this article in November 18, 2006, you have been warned numerous times about our Wikipedia:No personal attacks policy and have previously been blocked for violating it. However, since you were first informed of this policy, you have made no effort to remove or revert this attack page, so I am blocking you from editing for 1 week to reinforce the fact that Wikipedia has zero tolerance towards personal attacks. -- Netsnipe ► 13:43, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Mikedirnt69.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Mikedirnt69.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:
- Go to the image description page and edit it to add
{{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template. - On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.
Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Abu Badali 14:49, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Do not restore unsourced biographical content
Hello Hoponpop. Regarding your recent edits to the Billie Joe Armstrong article [3], please do not replace biographical content without providing reliable sources along with your changes. Please read this email by Jimmy Wales in this regard. Thank you, Can't sleep, clown will eat me 08:16, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Please review block
[edit] Your edit to Wikipedia:Featured articles
In this edit, you removed 1987 (What the Fuck Is Going On?) from the list of featured articles, even though it is indeed a featured article. Why did you do this ? What surprises me most is that it looks like you have been unblocked just a few hours ago, and this edit looks dangerously close to vandalism... Schutz 00:32, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Your Edit to Green Day
"it says right there in the source that it sold 15 million" you say in your last edit. Why didn't you just say that in the edit summary at first? You have a history of vandalism warnings and if you don't properly comment your edits, things like reverts on this are bound to happen. If you carefully explain your edits, i doubt it will happen much again TheDJ (talk • contribs • WikiProject Television) 03:03, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] License tagging for Image:Devilock2.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Devilock2.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 01:05, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Your edits to Uncle Tom
Please read and contribute to Talk:Uncle Tom#People accused of being an Uncle Tom and stop adding that list after it has been reverted ... having such a list violates WP:BLP, which mandates "Remove unsourced or poorly sourced controversial material", and if you add it again, I will get an administrator involved ... it is your responsibility to justify the inclusion of such a list in violation of Official Wikipedia Policy. --72.75.85.159 03:20, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Your edits to Clay Aiken
You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule on Clay Aiken. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from editing. - Maria202 23:35, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re: your comment on User talk:69.148.94.220
All right, thanks for the clarification. I frankly don't know much about the history of modern music, so I should stay away from those articles, and factual verification thereof... well, hopefully this IP actually gets an account and starts making good edits. I did have a problem with you saying "bad things will come your way"; this could be interpreted as a threat. (A certain editor had been accused of making threats when he said that he was going to use Occam's razor, but this is a bit more troubling.) I would suggest linking to or explicitly citing WP:BLOCK, not because he won't know what it means, but because I (looking at the page) wouldn't know. Thanks. GracenotesT § 06:15, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] The Acro-brats
A tag has been placed on The Acro-brats, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}}
on the top of the page (below the existing db tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.
For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Static Universe talk|contribs 07:02, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Tvcity.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Tvcity.jpg. 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 10:57, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Gavin Newsom
Please quit reversing the Gavin Newsom heading. Your editing is awkward and not descriptive. Thanks you. 71.139.27.85 04:01, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
No reason given for deletion of the SFWeekly/ Peter Byrne external link, which expands upon the Getty-Newsom connection mentioned in the SF Chronicle article. I've put it back. Elricky 08:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Allstuff2.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Allstuff2.jpg. 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 09:07, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] blink-182 Pop Punk vs Punk Rock vote
As you have recently contributed to the blink-182 article you might be interested in casting your vote towards reaching a final consensus on the bands genre, Pop Punk or Punk Rock, votes can be cast here. cheers mate --Dan027 07:05, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Message on User Page
Hi there - I noticed that you inadvertantly left a message on the userpage of User:D tonack instead of on his talk page. He's less likely to see it where it's at. I'd move it myself, but Hagermanbot might want to slap my signature on it, so I thought I'd leave it up to you if that's ok. Cheers, Figma 06:24, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] The Who
"Possibly the greatest live band ever" is a direct quote from the cited source. In order to avoid POV, I cited it that way on purpose. Ckessler 19:10, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
It's a quote from Rolling Stone, an acceptable source. This is a compromise, and is better than having unsourced, obviously POV statements in an article. Ckessler 19:33, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] blanking cited facts
Hello Hoponpop69. Please refer to the discussion board as to why the false citations were removed. Olir 16:58, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
- I decided to leave the sources in, despite your failure to read the discussion board or the edit summaries. So nevermind. However I did add sources for punk rock and alt rock of which you comically said there were citations needed for, when there were so many already listed on the discussion page. Olir 17:27, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Civility
I just noticed your remark at User talk:Olir. Try to remain civil please. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 04:56, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- pull your head it, theres no need to make comments like that at another user, it could result in you getting blocked also. --Dan027 06:59, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Blanking cited facts.
Please do not blank cited facts on the Blink-182 page. Giving you the benefit of the doubt I assume you must not have watched them all the way through, for example they talk at the end after the song. Also you deleted a source refering to the song apple shampoo, this song is also a valid source. If you do not know much about Blink-182 I understand why you thought you should delete it. Also please do not leave messages on my talk page as if you are trying to score points on a personal level against me, its very unprofessional. I, on the other hand am only interested in the articles. Olir 09:59, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- Also you should look at the notes I have left beside the links. Giving you the benefit of the doubt I assume you missed them. This should help you incase you make the same mistake again Olir 10:21, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] WP:PROD
Hi, could I request that you very quickly scan through the WP:PROD policy just to check that you understand the basics. Essentially, according to WP:PROD#Conflicts, when someone removes a prod notice, you shouldn't revert. Thanks, Addhoc 18:28, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- I see someone beat me to that. As Addhoc said, any removal of the PROD template is considered someone contesting the deletion, which means it can't be PRODed. The Right Thing (tm) to do is put the article up for deletion, which I've done for you: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Emo_violence. -FunnyMan 19:58, 4 March 2007 (UTC) (well, a few mins earlier than that, actually, I'm just an idiot)
[edit] blink 182
I've protected the page until you and Olir (along with all the other editors with an interest in the article) can agree on the necessary wording, and as an aside, your really sailing close to the wind for being blocked for grossly incivil conduct and revert/edit warring. -- Nick t 23:55, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Indian Summer (band)
Please leave an edit summary in the future, especially when making a major change such as adding a speedy deletion template. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 03:26, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] You're still doing it
Edit summaries are very important. See your edits here. This is especially true when introducing momentous changes. Please start leaving edit summaries. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 03:34, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Please sign talk pages
See your recent edit to Talk:Dead To Me. On talk pages, you should be signing every edit you make with four tildes (like ~~~~). Thanks. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 05:00, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Michael Richards
Greetings, I'm writing to you to let you know that I generally agree with your push to have a mention of the Laugh Factory incident mentioned in the lead of the article. I invite you to join discussion about this. Cheers. (→Netscott) 21:43, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry I reverted you. That language will never fly in the lead. I've kept the lead wording toned in accord with WP:NPOV. (→Netscott) 23:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I do actually tend to agree with your edits but after having worked on the article since the day the story broke about the cell phone video I know that such language is not seen as neutral by a consensus of editors. (→Netscott) 23:28, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
- You know if you'd just change the word "racist" backed to "racial" there'll likely be much less resistance to that sentence being in the lead. I'm not sure if you are aware of it but if you haven't already done so then I invite you to familiarize yourself with the Wikipedia:Three-revert rule. Also it is best to use article talk pages to discuss edits like this. (→Netscott) 00:41, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I do actually tend to agree with your edits but after having worked on the article since the day the story broke about the cell phone video I know that such language is not seen as neutral by a consensus of editors. (→Netscott) 23:28, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Simple Plan
I'm not sure if you were trying to vandalize the Simple Plan article, but please don't be reckless with your editing. That is all. — Ian Lee (Talk|contribs) 01:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Michael Richards
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. -- No Guru 01:37, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
- Re. this edit summary, please note that good faith editing is not vandalism, even if you think it's bad editing. Leaving provocative messages is not the way to achieve resolution. Tyrenius 02:15, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] You have been blocked for 24 hours
You have been blocked for violating the 3RR on Michael Richards. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 08:30, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Pee-wee Herman
Wikipedia:Lead section states:
"The lead should be capable of standing alone as a concise overview of the article, establishing context...and briefly describing its notable controversies"
That is why I am adding that part. The lead in this article also needs more info on his general career which I will add later today. I am just trying to improve this articles lead section.Hoponpop69 23:59, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
- indeed...i just don't agree with your assessment of the notability of the incident in giving it an entire paragraph that--pardon my frankness--is not very well written. --emerson7 | Talk 00:21, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
- honestly, dude, i'm just trying to help you out here, but i'm giving it less than 24 hours before someone wipes out your edits. i think you are reading waaay more into the mos than what's there. i admire, and honour your efforts, but i just think your submissions do not add to the integrity of the article. …i'm just sayin'… --emerson7 | Talk 01:06, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Civility in edit summaries
This edit summary is inappropriate. Please remain calm and civil in your editing. Thanks, Gwernol 01:46, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- In fact "due" is not a word you would use to describe charges for an impeachment. He was charged with the crimes of..... Second, your statement is POV, because it is not necessary to describe why he was impeached in that section, because it will be described later in the article. I will overlook your edit warring and incivility.Orangemarlin 04:53, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Indian Summer (band)
You have added an {{AfD}} tag to the Indian Summer (band) article, but failed to complete the second and third steps of the AfD nomination. I have removed the AfD tag for the moment. Feel free to replace it when you have time to complete the full nomination. Thanks, Gwernol 09:41, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Further personal attack warning
With regards to your comments on Talk:Blink-182: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Gwernol 09:42, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Attempted AfD for Indian Summer
Here is the article as you left it. If you read The AfD instructions you'll see the only thing you'd done was step I adding the {{afd1}} tag to the article. You hadn't done steps II and III. The reason I didn't complete them for you is:
- I'm not going to do the work for you.
- I have no idea what the reason you wanted to give for the deletion was. You should have given that reason in the second step.
Thanks, Gwernol 20:23, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Michael Richards Vietnam
Regarding this edit, please don't just change text without any explanation. If you wish to change this text, then discuss at Talk:Michael_Richards#Vietnam_veteran. It is recommended to leave edit summaries. Tyrenius 00:44, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Regarding edits to Warped Tour 2007
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Hoponpop69! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule \bpurevolume\.com\/, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links policy for more information. If the link was to an image, please read Wikipedia's image tutorial on how to use a more appropriate method to insert the image into an article. If your link was intended to promote a site you own, are affiliated with, or will make money from inclusion in Wikipedia, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 01:33, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Please Be Aware
You have recently posted a message on the page of user 68.88.76.165. Please be aware that the IP Address in question is generic, assigned randomly to users within the SBC DSL Internet system.
[edit] March 2007
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. GDon4t0 (talk to me...) 20:35, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Warped Tour 2007
The page has been fixed. Edit away...GDon4t0 (talk to me...) 13:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Thank you.Hoponpop69 16:52, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] April 2007
This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Talk:Michael Richards, you will be blocked from editing. Bulbous 23:24, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- The edit you made here is a blatant violation of WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL. Please put your point of view without speaking in that way or you'll be blocked from editing. If things are getting frustrating, then go off and do something else to get matters into perspective. Tyrenius 02:07, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- I came here to say the same really. I removed part of your post. Calling people morons etc is simply not allowed here. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 07:35, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] BLP issue with Ben Weasel
Ben Weasel has written us to object to several elements of the Wikipedia article about him. He has asserted that they are factually incorrect, and because they are wholly unsourced, I have thus removed them. Please do not insert any contentious information into biographies of living persons unless you can provide impeccable sources to cite. Thank you. FCYTravis 15:18, 6 April 2007 (UTC)