User talk:Ibaranoff24

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived. If further archiving is needed, see Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.

Previous discussions:

[edit] FAC "votes"

Ibaranoff24, per your recent "votes" at FAC pages (here and here), I implore you to consider your comments a bit more carefully. FAC is not a vote; you don't support "per" someone, you support because you have carefully vetted the article against the featured article criteria. Are you seriously saying that you carefully read through those articles and did not find any problems? In both cases, you posted your "support" right after I identified significant issues, which means you're either saying we should ignore those issues or you completely disagree with me. I went back through your other recent contributions to FAC and I see more of the same. Support "per" someone and never any substantive comments. The only time I see you opposing recently (here) is for a completely illogical reason.

At any rate, you are making the job of serious reviewers harder because we have to take more time to delineate the issues you are ignoring. --Laser brain (talk) 14:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Insane Clown Posse

The article looks good. I can't thoroughly scan it just now, but off hand, I think it's clunky in the infobox under the image. Maybe try to simplify that a bit. Plus, is that all the fair use/free images you can get? I'd be inclined to remove the "faygo" image unless you have at least two or three momre that's actually of the band. Maybe pop something in from a video clip. I know its not fair use, but you can substantiate purpose pretty easily. --rm 'w avu 22:26, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I understand. Just to let you know, there's quite a volume of articles that are FA out there that have a substantial amount of fair use images in them. Have a look at Hollaback Girl for instance. As to the content, I've had a bit more of a skim through and I think you have a LOT of sic work there, and think you need to start paraphrasing lines. You can always include the actual quotation in a footnote or in a reference, but every line makes it look sloppy and reads poorly from the perspective of flow. I think there needs to be more information on their wrestling federation. I realise there's a whole article about it, but you should just use {{main}} at the start and have a section of this dedicated to articulating that. I think wrestling in general throughout the article needs a lot more thorough coverage. Generally speaking, it's a ratehr informative article, seems to cover the aspects of their music adequately (from the perspective of one who doesn't really know them, other than that they were complicit in Eminem's early-fame arrest). I think you need to put it forward to the league of copyeditors, beg and plead that they'd have a look over it, because they have a habit of fleshing out informating from references, as well as quality checking them, and most importantly, they write really well, which is something I think you need to review in regards to all of the quotations (especially in the live section). Oh, another thing I'd include would be a critical response to their live performances. If they're such an important and notably distinct live show, there's bound to be ample coverage from live music reviewers. I'd include that in there too. I know it possibly will end up a seemingly eroneously long article by including my suggestions, considering it's already longer than most, but considering the subject matter, it's only fair to assume (to me) that it should be there. --rm 'w avu 12:56, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Request for copyediting

Hi. I noticed you were on the list of LOCE members and a member of WikiProject Films. I was wondering if you would be interested in taking a look at the Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song article and doing a copyedit on it? The sections "Music," "Editing," "Response" and "Legacy" look great, but the rest of the article isn't quite up to standards. This article could be a great GA and eventual FA, but it's not quite there yet. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 14:18, 10 June 2008 (UTC))

Sure. VolatileChemical (talk) 21:32, 10 June 2008 (UTC)