User talk:Kresock/Archive 4

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

cleaned-up ACW battles infobox to match other like articles

Thanks for your help. Some guys have been sweeping through hundreds of articles with AWB, "cleaning up" articles in arbitrary ways. Beats me why they chose to mess that up; they don't always. Hal Jespersen (talk) 14:58, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

  • No problem. Doesn't slight cleanups for our slight cleanups cut into our anti-vandal time?! This isn't the first adjustment to those sweeps I've done, and I bet I'm not alone, but the good intentions are strongly there and its probably worth it. Kresock (talk) 00:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Garbage milk 7 UK cover.jpg)

Thanks for uploading [[:Image:Garbage milk 7 UK cover.jpg]]. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 23:59, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Longstreet

And I thought Longstreet's article was quite stable, oh silly me! And I'm still not sure why this discussion wasn't carried out on the talk page for the article. Anyways I was under the impression that Wert has been relied upon as a trusted resource about the general, the most thorough and probably the most complete one out there. Even my keyboard recommends him! Your compromises should prevent any 3RR nonsense from occurring, and that's good. Like you say, the hashing out is best left up to other readers to decide with (hopefully) all evidence and points of view available in the page. Kresock (talk) 02:25, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, it is pretty stable, except for occasional episodes like this one, which is arguing over a couple of sentences. The reason it isn't on the article Talk page is that I couldn't induce 110fremont to discuss it there. All of it could be moved over. Hal Jespersen (talk) 14:00, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Ruby

There's really no reason to include a band logo unless it's highly notable (ie. Nine Inch Nails). As for the reviews, you can quote a line or two per album in the body of the article, but there's no need for a separate section, especially if they just list various reviews with no context. Check out how some reviews are integrated into the article at R.E.M.. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:28, 7 May 2008 (UTC)