User talk:Rep07
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Speedy deletion of Necropolis of love
A tag has been placed on Necropolis of love requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. --Snigbrook (talk) 23:39, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] March 2008
When adding links to material on an external site, as you did to Music and Lyrics, please ensure that the external site is not violating the creator's copyright. Linking to websites that display copyrighted works is acceptable as long as the website's operator has created or licensed the work. Knowingly directing others to a site that violates copyright may be considered contributory infringement. This is particularly relevant when linking to sites such as YouTube, where due care should be taken to avoid linking to material that violates its creator's copyright. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If you believe the linked site is not violating copyright with respect to the material, then you should do one of the following:
-
- If the linked site is the copyright holder, leave a message explaining the details on the article Talk page;
- If a note on the linked site credibly claims permission to host the material, or a note on the copyright holder's site grants such permission, leave a note on the article Talk page with a link to where we can find that note;
- If you are the copyright holder or the external site administrator, adjust the linked site to indicate permission as above and leave a note on the article Talk page;
If the material is available on a different site that satisfies one of the above conditions, link to that site instead. Collectonian (talk) 02:36, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on Tokyo Mew Mew. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Do not leave snide and insulting remarks about other editors in your edit summaries. Doing so violates WP:CIVILITY, as does making retaliatory edits. Collectonian (talk) 09:34, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] RE:B-52s
I've replied on the article's talk page. Nikki311 22:35, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- I understand your frustration...I really do, but that's why it is best that the various WikiProjects grade the articles, not the people working on the articles themselves, because they tend to get emotionally attached. I also understand what you are saying about the description of article classes on the assessment page. The problem is, however, that most WikiProjects have the default descriptions created a long time ago (see Template:Grading scheme), so when they create higher standards, they can't change the descriptions as it is would change it for every project. Also, sometimes articles slip under the radar and get classified as higher than they should be, and I haven't gone through the B articles in awhile to do quality control. I'll look through them in the next week or so (and will probably end up downgrading a good many) if that will make you happy. I really don't want to fight with you about this, as I really do not like conflict. Please continue to improve the article, and I'll be happy to reassess when the time comes. Also, if you ever want the article to be a Good Article, I do a lot of reviewing there and can give you some good feedback in a pre-GA review. Nikki311 04:13, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Re:Jutland Edit/Gallery
I've got be perfectly honest, I'm confident that when I've pulled my finger out and completed my draft it'll wipe the floor in every respect with the existing article. Arrogant, dismissive &c. - yes, but I'm tired of the same old tripe being repeated and reused in the existing article. Of course, if I did just replace it I'd get a raft of MILHIST editors to review it before hand. I'd much rather produce a decent article then get it sniped at than the exisiting process whereby a lot of us (myself included) bitch on the talk page then don't do anything. regards, --Harlsbottom (talk|library) 
21:13, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. I understand your concern about the work you've put in to the article. I have to say I'm not impressed by the use of Massie as a key source. (as in not impressed by Massie, not you!) I've read through Castles of Steel before - if memory serves he does reference his work pretty well, amidst the thousands of lines of florid text. Is there any chance you can cite the works he uses rather than Castles of Steel itself? It's just that from the years I've spent studying naval history I have never ceased to be amazed by the way in which historians twist the source matter to fit their argument. At any rate, if I were to start copying my work into the mainspace article, it would have to be one section at a time, a) so of course if people object it's easily removable and b) I'm always finding something relevant to plug in.--Harlsbottom (talk|library) 12:01, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] re:B-52's
Hi there. Actually I did not add the tour info - I just corrected a link in the sentence. I'll check out the article again tho and find as many sources as I can. See ya! - eo (talk) 11:14, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
