User talk:Jameselmo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Are You Experienced

Please don't break the links to the song articles by changing "Third" to "3rd" or stripping away the question mark on the title track. Thanks. Torc2 (talk) 01:19, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] If 6 Was 9

Hey, nice edit to the Hendrix article. Two things you should be aware of when you make great edits like this. One, briefly describe the changes you have made in the edit summary before you click save. That helps other editors see what you are doing in the recent changes and watchlists. Two, get in the habit of using sources. You write, "but Eddie Kramer the engineer on the session says Hendrix bought a secondhand recorder from a street vendor and used this", but the reader has no way of checking up on this. Where did you hear it? If it's a liner note, interview, or whatever, say so and I'll help you add the right reference. Thanks, and keep up the good work. —Viriditas | Talk 02:54, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the source. Please note that the source you added has the wrong title and author, and will require a page number for verification. The actual title is Hendrix: Setting the Record Straight, and the correct author is John McDermott. The contributing author is Kramer. Also, please get in the habit of filling out edit summaries. Thanks. I've provided instructions for edit summaries below. Happy editing. —Viriditas | Talk 08:57, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Here's the book cte you want to add to the article. All you need to do is add page number(s):
<ref>{{cite book
  | last = McDermott
  | first = John
  | coauthors = Eddie Kramer
  | title = Hendrix: Setting the Record Straight
  | publisher = Warner Books
  | date = 1992
  | pages = 
  | isbn = 0446394319 
}}</ref>

—Viriditas | Talk 13:16, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Edit summaries

Hi there. When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:
Edit summary text box

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field. If you are adding a section, please do not just keep the previous section's header in the Edit summary field - please fill in your new section's name instead. Thank you. —Viriditas | Talk 08:57, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] References in Jimi Hendrix article

The way you have inserted references to four books like here is not adequate. Please read WP:CITE on how to cite properly. You are essentially just mentioning four book titles again and again over and over. Readers should instead be able to see where particular information can be verified; e.g., though page numbers in specific references. The way you have done it is simply not detailed enough.--HJensen, talk 14:36, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hi friend

Welcome to Wikipedia, it might be a good idea to read WP:MUSTARD if you haven't... most articles/user pages have a discussion page... this is your discussion page. Feel free to reply to this here. By the way, when discussing things on an article's talk page, you don't need to start a new header every time you write something. If you want to reply to what someone has written on a talk page you just put this symbol before the first word of what you write : - I hope this helps. If you have any questions please don't hesitate to contact me. ScarianCall me Pat 21:49, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Just a small note about the ongoing discussion about your edits in the Jimi Hendrix article: I've made all your new sections subsections of the discussion, so please use three equal signs ("===subheading title==") on each side for new sections; that way they'll fall under the next level heading and make things easier to follow there. Thanks. +ILike2BeAnonymous (talk) 22:40, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Edits to Hendrix article

Hi. I haven't read your new edits yet, but I noticed that you inserted a lot of <wiki>[citation needed]</nowike> tags. That is fine, but I don't think you need to have square brackets around the text you think need to be cited. It makes the article appear even more of a draft that it does already. Also, you may want to use the sandbox when editing (or copy the text into another editor). This will enable you to come off with fewer, but larger edits (remember edit summaries) thereby making it easier for other editors to assess what you have been doing (compared with now where you make numerous small edits within short time). Happy editing --HJensen, talk 21:17, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi der mr Jensen the square brackets are there to clearly point out extremely contentious and often unproveable assertion in this article (regardless if they are supplied with references)that are embedded in an otherwise acceptable text. Basically someone needs take most of this out as it brings the article into extreme disrepute and propagates myths and mis-information that has unfortunately, through constant repetition become regarded as fact, despite (relatively) recently researched and publicised, more accurate information. I have no desire to puff up this article, most of my earlier large edits were just my way of explaining the various mistakes in the previous article (not knowing how else to communicate at the time) hence the frequent "or"s a device to juxtapose the less hyperbolic or more rational explanations and sometimes the actual facts to some wild speculation and/or hyperbole. I naively asumed that the many Hendrixc fans at wiki would rush to check out the recent info and when they found it to be verifiable would incorporate said entries into the article. As this suff is quoted (for some unknown reason) on the BBC site etc. it should be a priorty edit.

[edit] February 2008

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary, which wasn't included with your recent edit to Jimi Hendrix discography. Thank you. Wexcan (talk) 13:04, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button Image:Signature_icon.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 15:27, 9 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Trackrecs.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Trackrecs.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:48, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Note

Please don't start a new section heading on the Talk:Jimi Hendrix article every time you have something new to say. And please do not type in capitals in section headings; it is considered "shouting". Please remain WP:CIVIL at all times. ScarianCall me Pat 10:48, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] March 2008

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Robert Christgau. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. / edg ☺ ☭ 01:37, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

In this one case - "Christ"gau, a different site -, I may have strayed into uncited personal opinion in passing (two words only!). How about instead of the wilfully exaggerated "Your edits" and "have been" you restricted yourself to "Your edit" and "has been". If adding two words of possible personal opinion (I think I could come up with a few cites to support this definition) to an article in wikipedia can be condemned as "vandalism" and you apply this universally across wikipedia you have a very busy time ahead of you - eternity springs to mind.Jameselmo (talk) 02:02, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

All of my edits are well researched and usually come with pertinent 'Refs'/'cites' from well respected publications on Hendrix, frequently from the man himself or those close to him,(all will eventually and "soon" compared with stuff that's been here forever), I have included many recently and far more than appear to have been to many of the innacurate or misleading statements still left) NOT from record companies slavishly puffed handouts, uneducated opinion and sensational, lazy rock magazine fluff, they are only corrections to the blatant vandalism, plagiarism, hyperbole, inaccuracy, trivial nonsense etc. etc. in the Jimi Hendrix article, in no-way can this be construed as "vandalism". Jameselmo (talk) 02:02, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Jimi Hendrix problems

Please read WP:MOS in order to get an idea on how to write on Wikipedia. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. ScarianCall me Pat 13:41, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I am contacting you now. Please tell me precisely, what your percieved problems are with my edits and in comparison with others that have not been commented upon, but are uncited, riddled with verbalise, plagiarism, innacuracy and other nonsenseJameselmo (talk) 00:24, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Jimi Hendrix talk page

Please don't remove the comments you've left there. Please WP:ARCHIVE them instead. Thank you. ScarianCall me Pat 15:41, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Please read the above policy I have given you. Please stop removing "your stuff". We archive comments. We do not remove them. Please be aware of this. If you continue to ignore my edit summaries and messages I will warn you for removing material without establishing your reasoning. ScarianCall me Pat 15:49, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I want my stuff off here. My reasoning? I wrote it, I want it off, simple.Jameselmo (talk) 02:31, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Copy-and-paste page moves

Hello, Jameselmo. Concerning your contribution, Stepping Stone (Hendrix song), a page move cannot be done by simply copying and pasting the contents of a page into a new location, as such a process does not transfer the page's edit history and therefore violates the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL). As a violation of the page move process, Stepping Stone (Hendrix song) needs to be temporarily deleted under the speedy deletion criteria so that the page you intended to move may be properly moved in a way that will preserve its edit history. Stepping Stone (Hendrix song) has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If not, please refrain from editing either the page you intended to move or Stepping Stone (Hendrix song) until the latter has been deleted according to Wikipedia's speedy criterion G6 (non-controversial housekeeping).

If you did not intend to make a page move, then please insert the {{hangon}} tag right below the {{db-copypaste}} tag in Stepping Stone (Hendrix song) and state your intentions on Talk:Stepping Stone (Hendrix song). An administrator will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do. Thank you for your contributions. Daltxn (talk) 19:26, 2 April 2008 (UTC)