User talk:Hattrem
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome!
Hello, Hattrem, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- 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:Where to ask a question, 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! -℘yrop (talk) 23:55, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] List of Norwegian Wikipedians
You Wikipedian, you! :-) I took the liberty of adding you to the list of Norwegian Wikipedians. You better not mind. – Pladask 13:07, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Cohen articles
Hi, and thanks for cleaning up some of my typos on the Cohen album articles. I'd like to ask you what you think of merging I'm Your Fan and Tower of Song into Leonard Cohen and the various albums that the tribute songs are from. WP:Album suggests that compilations don't usually deserve an article, and I think that everything that one can say about these two compilations can be fit into the primary articles (some of which are still rather bare-bones). Any thoughts? Jkelly 18:42, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
- Hello, and thank you for your valuable contributions!
- I don't really object to your proposition, as the information contained in these two articles could be split between the Cohen page and the original albums – but would like to point out that while I'm Your Fan and Tower of Song are indeed compilations, all the tracks were original recordings (as far as I know). – Hattrem 05:43, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
-
- That's true, and there's no reason to be hasty about a merge. We can see what things look like once all the information is in other articles, which it isn't. On a side note, I don't think it's typical to bold everything in the track list. Is there some reason to do that? Jkelly 13:59, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- No other reason than that the songs are what the albums are really about. But it's no important thing to me and I won't insist. About a merge, I guess we'll see. As there are over a thousand cover recordings of Cohen songs, we obviously can't list them all in the album articles. I'm Your Fan and Tower of Song may be the most obvious collections to mention, but I'm concerned it might open for all kinds of additions about other cover recordings. – Hattrem 16:12, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Okay, I'm going to go ahead with the un-bolding, for the sake of standardization. I also think that Wp's back-end treats bolded text in a particular way, which may or may not be a good thing. If it makes the article more prominent in the search list when someone searches for things, I think that there is a good argument for bolding, but that discussion should probably happen at WP:ALBUM. As for the cover versions situation, as I have been slowly getting the information into the articles, it seems that those covers are now way too dominant for some of the albums. I think that the thing to do here is for me to hold off on anymore merging, and instead start bulking up the articles with information about the album and the Cohen recordings, which really should be the focus. In the (very) long-term, I'm thinking that Songs of Leonard Cohen, at least, might make a reasonable FA candidate, as it was a rather significant recording. With that in mind, I'm going to make an effort to properly reference the expanding I hope to do over the next little while. I hope that you'll continue to help out! Jkelly 17:18, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- I'll continue contributing to the Cohen articles and look forward to seeing them grow. – Hattrem 03:19, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
[edit] Greetings, fellow Leonard Cohen fan
I have fixed the page history problem involving Famous Blue Raincoat. The old revisions have been restored and moved to the correct title along with the new ones (see history). If you see any more cases where this has happened, please post them at the Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen or at my talk page. — FREAK OF NURxTURE (TALK) 15:27, Dec. 20, 2005
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Edward_Rutherfurd.jpeg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Edward_Rutherfurd.jpeg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 non-free media lacking such an explanation 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. Rettetast 18:47, 21 September 2007 (UTC)