User talk:Stevekeiretsu

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Welcome

Hello Stevekeiretsu, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions on Durham Cathedral, it has a special place in my heart. 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! 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 or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!

Gareth Hughes 21:30, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] thanks

Thanks for the welcome! I can't say I really intend(ed) to get all that serious about "being a Wikipedian", like some of you venerable chaps, as I don't really feel expert enough in anything(!) - in fact I spent a while just doing a few minor edits here and there without bothering to get an account. But eventually got one... and it's quite addictive isn't it? :) Whiling away insomniac moments by filling in little gaps you find here and there...

By coincidence the article I've just made also features a very special church, although one at the opposite end of the size spectrum to Durham Cathedral! Check it out if you want: Trebetherick.

For what it's worth, I'm not religious, but I do find buildings like St Enodoc and Durham Cathedral have a undoubtedly powerful and profound spiritual quality, nonetheless.

Stevekeiretsu 01:59, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for contributing the article on Trebetherick. I'm sure someone will stumble across it from Cornwall, John Betjeman, Polzeath or another link, and help expand it a little more. Don't worry about not being an expert: just add what you think is needed, and let someone who knows a little more on that subject take it further. Most of the contributors here are quite ordinary people: it's the collaboration of many minds that does it. Have fun. Gareth Hughes 13:31, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] village etc. table

Some cities/towns/villages have the template some dont, i have been trying to push for it to be added to all, and have done so to all the List of places in Cambridgeshire. Another problem is that many have a shorter table with less data, hopefully eventually the more alert wikipedians such as yourself will notice and add or expand tables with basic data to all places. It is odd that london doesnt, although i think all the boroughs do, if you want to add a table to london (hint hint), the best idea would be to copy an established table from Washington for example, as the village template is probably not appropriate. thanks Bluemoose 19:32, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Yes i did, we must have been there at the same time, and I went to comberton village college, maybe you went there as well?

[edit] Drum and bass cleanup crew

This article is about to drop.
Make some noise for the rewind.

Hi there, you know me as Jim Bergerac from DOA, and I'm trying to set up a group of users to clean up and expand drum and bass articles on the Wikipedia. At the moment, little has been done, but I'm trying to drum up some support and improve the various articles. If you're interested, please visit me on my talk page - I'm going to add a list of articles that need some fixing quite soon. Current candidates include bad company and DJ Friction - as well as a solo article on Dan Fesh. More to follow. illWill 23:51, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions on my talk page - they are all good, and I'm going to think about them as soon as I'm done with this dissertation proposal. Aargghh. The one about an article on the term 'producer' in dance is especially good, although I think it might require quite a lot of work and some very careful link fixing from other articles. That's fine though, as it's a major oversight. I'm going to think about it, and maybe it would be a good idea to solicit the input of people who write a lot on house and hip-hop. Perhaps via one of these projects that you mentioned? Anyway, back to my homework now :) illWill 21:13, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Hello. I've been slacking off for the last week, but I've started to add a few things to the list. I did a little bit on the Metalheadz page, although I think it could do with a lot more. Do you have any ideas how to recruit more people to work on drum and bass articles? Obviously, a general post on DOA would be a bad idea unless we want the word 'clownstep' insterted in every entry, but maybe it would be an idea to PM people who we think might be interested. I'm also thinking of shifting the material to a Wikiproject page, perhaps so that more people see it, and getting my mate to deign a logo. I was thinking of a Hoover in camo. illWill 00:16, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Reword of drum and bass article, wikiproject

Hi there Steve. I'm in the process of rewording and copyediting the main Drum and bass article - I've done up to the 'musicology of drum and bass' section, which could do with alot more info added to it. I also added a section in the history bit for 'pioneers of drum and bass'. If you've got time, it would be handy if you could take a look and see if the changes are okay.

I'm also going to start a Wikiproject next week, and wondered of you had any suggestions, as the ones you put on my user talk page were pretty useful. I'm thinking that i will link to the project page from a post on DOA, and try and recruit people to write specific articles - the ones certain labels could do with a lot of work, although I noticed that you did a lot of good addition to Moving Shadow. I actually don't think vandalism from DOA would be too much of a problem, hopefully it would attract more useful contributors than pranksters, who soon get bored anyway. I'm also still thinking about your suggestion to create an article on the sense of the term Producer in electronic music, I'm just so busy with my MA dissertation at the moment that I have yet to take the plunge and create a whole new article. Thanks illWill 15:44, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

Ha, thanks for fixing the typos. I went in to copyedit and ended leaving more mistakes than I fixed. :) illWill 16:27, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
Heh no prob, just went to check out what you'd done and as usual couldn't help myself from fixing typos. At a mates house this w/e, can't reply properly, get back to ya next week...

[edit] Konflict

HI there. I agree, it's pretty lame that admins can delete something which they know next to nothing about. You can always recover the text later from the internet archive/waybaack machine, but it's pretty annoying of nobody notices that the article is gone. The article on Roni Size got deleted because it was a copyvio, but they could have just removed the text. It's a bit odd that admins see no problem with massive articles on minor characters from crappy anime series, but if a musical artist fails to Google test they get deleted. I've saved a few article from deletion by explaining that Google tests are unreliable for electronic artists as none of the magazines are archived, but there's still a lot which vanish. I think they're reforming the deletion process, but it still needs a lot of work.

I think this another good reason for a proper dnb wikiproject (which I will set up as soon as I've got my stuff unpacked in the new house), as that way it can be used to keep track of all the articles. If you ever get another situation like the Knoflict delete, message me and I'll back you up. Cheers User:Will Lakeman

[edit] Discussion re: merging Jungle music and Drum and bass

please join the discussion regarding merging these two articles. We need as many voices as possible. Themindset 11:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging Image:Timexile.jpg

Warning sign
This image may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Timexile.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Garion96 (talk) 23:37, 25 January 2006 (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] Barnstar of illness

Image:TTbarnstar.png

I hereby award you the barnstar of illness for your work on improving and defending the ill art of Drum and Bass on wikipedia. Themindset 17:39, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Goldie's Timeless

Hi there. Just wanted to let you know that I moved Timeless (album) to Timeless (Goldie album). There are at least 4 albums that I've found called Timeless, so I've made Timeless (album) into a disambiguation page. Thanks for creating the Goldie article in the first place. Mike Dillon 20:38, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Unfortunately, the Timeless (album) dab is now just a subset of the Timeless dab page. I'm going to request a speedy delete of it, since it's useless now. Your user pages contain the only remaining links to Timeless (album), so I wanted to give you a heads-up since they'll be showing up as redlinks. - Rynne 03:42, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Rumps

Just created the page on The Rumps, and am using your picture (Image:The_rumps.jpg) for it. Do you have any more information on the site? Thanks, Ryan McDaniel 19:54, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 84.44.* Is Back & Dafter Than Ever

First of all, your initial assessment/critique of the proclaimed "definition of Neurofunk" by a bunch of dorks on the DSCI4 forums was/is spot-on -- you know, the "definition" (that's not really a definition at all) claiming it has heavy/dark "funk elements" (pure BS) without any actual, comparative proof to back it up. See, basically, the way I see it is this: a new breed of DnB-kiddy (AKA Noisia/Pendulum/Mayhem/ETC. supporters/fans) has arisen from this big surge in non-UK producers finally getting heard -- due to so many quality UK producers leaving the scene and/or parting ways with partners, etc. -- and that aforementioned group of new wave "neuro-nerds" are doing any and everything they possibly can to segregate their lackluster, minimalistic sound (AKA poorly produced crap) from the original, well produced Neurofunk sound (e.g. Kemal, Stakka & Skynet, et al).

Anyway, this anonymous IP poster, with whom you first had issues, is back and has really started to get under my fucking skin. He can't support claims he's making, continually vandalizes the article, and thus I'm practically having to revert every single day (many times three or four times per day). I think we need to get a wiki-admin on this and propose a lock of the article and banning this 84.44 dipshit. Let me know what you think.

As far as the actual content in the article is concerned, truth be told, much of it is farfetched and fanciful nonsense. I propose what a lot of people did in the discussion section: we need to merge the Neurofunk article into the Techstep article and make it a subsection.

What a disgrace, though; this vandal not only claiming Noisia is Neuro (laughable), but also placing them above Kemal & Rob Data (as if their production level is even NEAR comparable). ...Beyond pathetic.

 –Bakemono Mon, 24 Jul 2006 13:24 (UTC)

You dont have a user/talk page so I'll answer you here and hope you see it.
Basically....... My position on this all along has been to try and avoid arguing about exactly what is and isn't Neurofunk. Is Noisia? Is Stakka and Skynet? I really couldn't say. I think it's a complete dead end arguing about it. I don't claim to know the true definition of neurofunk - and even if I did claim to, someone would disagree with me.
In the late 90s when I got into it, it was all just techstep to me. The only apparent basis of distinction between techstep and neurofunk is that neurofunk has funk elements. Well, I'm an occasional funk dj, I was into funk long before dnb, and I don't consider (techy) dnb to have true funk elements, by definition of the fact it is sequenced/quantised and not performed as a live band with human groove. But even if I relax that definition to "funky", as in, "danceable", well, I've heard some very funky Stakka and Skynet (whcih he insists is not neuro) and I've heard some very unfunky Optical. Anyway I went through my opinions on the talk page at some length (not just the section headed "84.* get a grip", but throughout, I don't know if you've read?) Not much point re-iterating.
And like I said, I don't want to get into all that again. *sigh* My whole point, it's so ridiculously subjective and only a tiny group of people into a niche-within-a-niche even pretend to be able to tell the difference. He is dominating that article with his POV as if it is objective fact, whereas clearly it is completely subjective. I have no problem with his opinion, but I don't think it's right for Wikpiedia. Wikipedia being what it is, the article should just say "some people think X, some people think Y", but he won't stand for it.
For example, you think it's "laughable" that Noisia are neuro -- personally I don't, I could happily roll with the idea that they are (I wouldn't insist they are, but I wouldn't disagree either). But something tells me if we were both editing the article, we would reach a compromise on this issue.
Whereas this 84.* dude isn't like that. It has to reflect his unilateral viewpoint and his 100 non-summarised edits per day style means nobody else can realistically join in editing the article anyway. What should happen is he puts his article about it up elsewhere, adds a few nuggets sourced from his article, referenced to his article as an external link for the source.
So basically I gave up on the whole article. I actually don't care that much to keep up the fight. I figured, fine, let him have his way. I think the moment a Wiki admin saw what was going on with that article, they'd take action anyway. If you want to point it out to an admin to accelerate that process, be my guest - my views are already there on the talk page (and here) for the admin to take into consideration. Otherwise, to be honest, I'll just let him continue the one man circle-jerk, it's not worth my time to fight it. The whole thing actually knocked my faith in the Wikipedia system in general, I've edited a lot less on other articles since I was driven to giving up on that page.
Stevekeiretsu 21:33, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the hasty reply, Steve. I actually tried to email you via the option on here -- as I figured that would be a little more appropriate in this case -- but apparently you don't have an email listed under your Wikipedia account, so I couldn't.

This, indeed, is the entire problem with Wikipedia, and it's people like this 84.* jerk-off that make me lose faith in it, too. However, given the way I am, I suppose I take the more aggressive stance. I just can't sit back and let him butcher an article with misinformation as he sees fit. The saddest part, though, is nobody has even reported him yet. (I can understand why you didn't, because he did stop for a period of time.) That's soon going to change, though, as I'm taking the admin route. And if need be, we'll put the article through the arbitration process.

If you read our discussions on the Neurofunk discussion page, I posed a very straightforward question to him that should be incredibly easy to answer (were there any truth in the bullshit he's shoveling), and he's, naturally, yet to reply with anything to support his claims pertaining to his version of the definition Neurofunk and Noisia being prominent Neurofunk artists.

I could sit here and again detail my personal stance on the definition of Neurofunk (or copy and paste it), but it's probably easiest (for both of us) for you to simply go to the discussion area on Neurofunk and scroll to the bottom. I just posted a massive... well... essay, laying out my feelings on the matter. In short, I'm pretty much aligned with your opinion and the opinion of a lot of other people who posted previously. If you would, just to get a feel for where I stand, check it out.

As far as the Noisia thing, I just think it's laughable he considers them "prominent" Neuro artists who far surpass Kemal & Rob Data in production. Now, that's not to say, given our (apparently mutual) take on the definition of Neurofunk, that they haven't done a few tracks in the past that could qualify as Neurofunk -- not 'good' or intricately produced Neuro, mind you, but Neurofunk nonetheless in the technical sense. But I definitely don't think they're solely "Neurofunk" artists, because a lot of their tracks aren't very funky at all, and many have more bass-driven, Tech-hardstep elements. So, I'm willing concede that they have done Neuro tracks, but to put them on the level of Konflict, Stakka & Skynet, and Ed Rush & Optical, quality-wise, as Neurofunk producers, is straight-up inconceivable.

And you're exactly right, were we at odds on this very issue editing the article, the issue would've already been solved. But because I'm having to deal with some guy who's probably a teen, with the intelligence and maturity level of an 8-year-old (e.g. using insults like "fuckface," and threatening me over the internet), more stringent counteractions are, unfortunately, necessary in this particular case, I feel. But, tell me what you think.

P.S. I should have a user talk page, so I'm not sure why it wasn't showing up for you.

 –Bakemono Tue, 25 Jul 2006 03:47 (UTC)

[edit] I've Requested (And Had Accepted) Advocacy Regarding The Neurofunk Article

I figured this would be an appropriate first step. My advocate has recently posted on the Neurofunk discussion page asking what our content/general disputes are. So, I'd say that if you want to get this dispute resolved and the Neurofunk article cleaned up (along with 84.44* gone) for good and all, now's your chance -- come voice your opinion about both the content and 84.44* to the advocate ASAP (I'm about to).

 –Bakemono Wed, 26 Jul 2006 13:41 (UTC)

[edit] New Photo Matching Service

Hi there,

I'm contacting you because you listed yourself at Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Photographers. You might be interested in a new wikiproject page that lists photographers and articles that need photos by location. The page is located at Wikipedia:Photo Matching Service or WP:PMS GabrielF 00:25, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../s/t/e/User_talk%7EStevekeiretsu_76f4.html"