User talk:Drewcifer3000/Archive 7

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents


Peer review?

Mate, could you please take a look at Wikipedia:Peer review/My Happiness (song)/archive1 when you have the time? Cheers, dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 11:20, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Sandbox: Sorry!

Sorry about that! I'll move it to my sandbox. Burningclean [speak] 13:59, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Caravaggio and featured list

I noticed your work on Caravaggio and I was wondering whether you had any interest in helping get Chronology of works by Caravaggio up to FL status? Remember (talk) 16:52, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Yeah Yeah Yeahs.jpg

Sorry about the template...was there supposed to be an OTRS ticket on the image? Most of your uploads are impeccably sourced and licensed. Kelly hi! 02:33, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

White Mountain art

I did receive a GA for White Mountain art. I thank you for your comments, and I believe that I have addressed your issues. Now, based on Moni3's suggestion, I have requested a peer review to prepare for FAC. I would very much appreciate your peer review. You helped me to eliminate my "non-encyclopedic" statements. Please re-review and give me feedback. Thanks! JJ (talk) 02:32, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of NBA champions

Y Done with all the comments. Thanks, « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie ( talk / contribs) 01:40, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

RE:Commons image

All commons images retain an image page here on Wikipedia. When you go to that image page, you will see the commons information. The trouble with Image:Sandra Nasić.jpg is that it was uploaded to commons without the accent on the c (ć), so it can be found at Image:Sandra Nasic.jpg or commons:Image:Sandra Nasic.jpg. I did make this clear in the deletion summary, but obviously not clear enough. ;) Woody (talk) 15:42, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I think you are over-thinking this. If they want to search for the image, there is a link in the deletion log and it is linked on the actual Sandra Nasic page so it is easily accessible. We don't usually have redirects to images as far as I know. Woody (talk) 15:52, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

3RR concerning the Broken EP issue

I'm sure you are aware of the 3RR policy. Before you break it, I have initiated a discussion here into whether Broken (Nine Inch Nails EP) is a studio album, and therefore Ghosts I-IV is the seventh album, and The Slip is the eighth etc. Please contribute to the discussion, so this can be put to bed soon. -- Reaper X 06:00, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Hoodoo Gurus discography

Have been having problems with my internet provider - so have only just addressed your comments about wiki-linking the dates. Am absolutely hopless at wiki-tables so would appreciate any assistance there. Dan arndt (talk) 03:38, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

The changes that you've made look great - thanks for the help. Dan arndt (talk) 05:30, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Brotherhood of Man discography

I can't believe you've just completely changed my page on Brotherhood of Man discography. Several administrators had seen the page, but none had told me to remove anything. All the pictures were fair use. The page as it stands is completely useless, and may as well be completely removed. Why do you so desperately want to ruin an informative page like this? One that I'd spent a lot of time putting together? It was a good refernce as to what songs were on each album and to what each album looked like. I'm disgusted.--Tuzapicabit (talk) 19:48, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I've just realised that you're one of the administrators that has viewed the page and gave me advice on it! Why did you suddenly decide to do this?--Tuzapicabit (talk) 19:51, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
I see you're involved in the Nine inch Nails page - well, what interest can Brotherhood of Man possibly have to a Nine inch nails fan? You've done this out of pure spite. I've deleted the info completely, because the page is completely useless as it was. --Tuzapicabit (talk) 20:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Just got your response, but the fact is Brotherhood of Man albums (all of them?) don't warrant a page each (only some of them actually charted)- hence the reason why I put all the albums on one page. So it's like a load of mini album pages in one. By the by, I'm certainly not spending any more time on this - I did my work and you took it away. Just forget it now. I'm done with Wikipedia. It was a labour of love at first, but it's been a nightmare since.--Tuzapicabit (talk) 20:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay, since things have calmed down, I've taken your advice and redone the BOM pages as seperate album pages. I do apologize for my over-reaction to your edits (can you tell I was having a bad day?!!) and my assumption that you were an administrator. I do understand of course the need to keep Wikipedia accurate and to the correct format. I myself have made several edits to other people's articles (although perhaps not as big, unless I am fairly confident I can radically improve the subject matter, but I bow to your greater experience). Again, please accept my apologies and hopefully in time I will learn to take these changes on the chin a little more. Thanks for being so patient (and more mature!)in your replies.--Tuzapicabit (talk) 00:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. Having looked at it, I have to agree the Nine Inch Nails discog is really impressive and has given me allsorts of ideas (I'd never even considered putting a write-up on a discography page - I thought of it as just a list page). It's a shame the picture crteria is so strict as the Live picture you've used somehow doesn't really fit the article (not unless the concert in question was released as an album) - or perhaps a photo of all their albums/singles laid out might work. It's given me an idea for a few other acts as well - funnily enough, Brotherhood of Man are not my favourite artist (they were my first love - so I know quite a lot about them), but other artist pages I can't get near, although perhaps I could do a discography on Bucks Fizz. Their page is not great (I've done pages for all their albums and members), but I know the guy that wrote the main page, so I'm reluctant to tamper with it. (Although I suppose I'm lucky in that I have one group that no-one else seems really to want to write about (although I do know a few mega-fans - but perhaps they've got lives!) - so it's all down to me! My brother is an Abba fan - so you can imagine how far he'd get on their page before it was pounced upon!) Anyway, this is me just thinking aloud - ignore my ramblings. Thank you again for opening my eyes to the possibilities and being so understanding. --Tuzapicabit (talk) 07:14, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Re:FLC closings and junk

I agree with you that it would be great if I include every list I close in my edit summary, but I think doing it all at once is better. (closing 12 so that you can fit all of them in the edit summary boxes could be upwards of 4 edits depending on how long the titles are) Usually I try to get to closures every day, but I've fallen a little behind as of late and have closed more than my normal amount. At WP:FAC Sandy's edit summaries are always "pr/ar". -- Scorpion0422 05:09, 30 May 2008 (UTC)