Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:19, 25 June 2011

Copyright violation in Dan Schafer

AfD nomination of Steven Joseph Christopher

AFI

It's also worth noting that allmusic continues to list hardcore punk as one of their genres throughout their releases all the way up to today. It notes an increasingly wide spectrum of influences, but nevertheless, according to that source they are still playing hardcore punk. If you can provide sources that contradict it, that say "They don't still play hardcore punk", then you've got a case. Prophaniti (talk) 20:28, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

All music is an unreliable sack of shit for music genres. Here are multiple sources saying they are no longer a Hardcore punk band Hoponpop69 (talk) 03:42, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Hoponpop, even if they no longer write/market 'hardcore punk' those songs still exist, and are by the band. Therefore, the genre still fits. Landon1980 (talk) 04:27, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes the genre still belongs on the page but not in the intro sentence. The Beastie Boys were once a hardcore band, those songs still exist, but their intro sentence does not describe them as a hardcore punk band because like AFI they now primarily play a different genre of music.Hoponpop69 (talk) 16:26, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Tune in, Tokyo...

List of Offspring band members

I left a message about the prog tag on the List of Offspring band members article on the talk page. Alex (talk) 02:28, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Coffin Caddies

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (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 confirm the subject's notability under Misplaced Pages guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Cazbahrocker (talk) 23:53, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Your tagging of record labels

Hoponpop69, please do not re-tag articles once a speedy-delete has already been declined. Also, please be aware that a record label does not have to be clearly notable (per WP:N) to escape a speedy, it only has to have some assertion of significance or importance. Most of the articles you are tagging would need an AfD discussion before they could be deleted. Thanks, Paul Erik 03:22, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

TNSrecords

Hoponpop69,

You have twice marked the TNSrecords article not notable, first in December 2008, and second in June 2009, twice it was rejected almost immediately, most recently by user "Paul Erik". What's more, when I created the article (having been surprised that no article already existed) I recieved the following message "I have no concerns that notability criteria have been met. " from user "LittleOldMe" when we discussed notability.

I must ask why you seem sop adamant to have the article, which clearly no one else has an issue with, deleted?

Mozza1979 (talk) 08:10, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Did I Do That? Hoponpop69 (talk) 22:27, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

List of Ramones concerts

• Hi, thanks for adding the Lollapalooza dates to the article. Do you have a reference for them? All of the previous dates all came from the same source and the hope was that more references would be added as time went on, this was the main concern when it was an AfD. Thanks J04n(talk page) 14:57, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Got it from here . Not sure if that is considered a reliable source or not.Hoponpop69 (talk) 15:59, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, there is no way to tell if the Ramones were even actually at each show. I'll see if I can find something better. Thanks J04n(talk page) 16:46, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Art punk and Avant-punk

Neither of these articles is on my watch list currently, and, frankly, I wash my hands of them. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 03:50, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

My point is that I am past caring. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 22:47, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Dude

Chill. --Closedmouth (talk) 15:29, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Can you?

In the page Emo you appear to have made a Revision as of 12:48, 1 September 2009. You added text and some references. One of those reference tags, <ref name="allmusic"/> appears to be causing a cite error. Could you please go back and fill out the full source to fix the cite error. Thanks. 75.69.0.58 (talk) 21:35, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Done.Hoponpop69 (talk) 03:12, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: At the Wake

Hello Hoponpop69, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of At the Wake - a page you tagged - because: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. decltype (talk) 16:03, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Classics Of Love

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 that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Alastair Rae (talk) 15:02, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: The Motorettes

Hello Hoponpop69, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of The Motorettes - a page you tagged - because: national tour, notable label, co-headlining with notable band, hit single = credible assertions of significance. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know.  Skomorokh, barbarian  19:53, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Crashcarburn

Hello Hoponpop69, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Crashcarburn - a page you tagged - because: Album produced by grammy award winners, and numerous media promotions/appearances is probably enough to get through CSD. PROD or take to AfD if required. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. GedUK  15:32, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: New Adventures (band)

Hello Hoponpop69, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of New Adventures (band) - a page you tagged - because: was de-prodded before by experienced editor claiming coverage in reliable sources. Use WP:AFD instead if deletion is needed . Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. SoWhy 16:32, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Revolver (French band)

Hello Hoponpop69, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Revolver (French band) - a page you tagged - because: Appear to be signed to EMI which is enough tosave from speedy. Suggest WP:AFD as the appropriate forum. . Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. Nancy 18:47, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Made of Hate

Hello Hoponpop69, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Made of Hate has been removed. It was removed by Chubbles with the following edit summary 'contest; assertions of notability made, AFM releases. Tag for tone.'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Chubbles before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 19:49, 27 November 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 19:49, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

If You Will

Since you PRODded this, FYI: Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/If You Will. --Glenfarclas (talk) 04:07, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Hoponpop69! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created are Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to these articles, it would greatly help us with the current 3 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

1. Dan Panic - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
2. Rick Parashar - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:02, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

GA reassessment of Green Day

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the article which you can see at Talk:Green Day/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:52, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Username spoofed

Hi, Hoponpop69. Prolific sockpuppeteer User:AFI-PUNK created a sock named User:Poponhop69, who vandalized your userpage. Can you recall having a run-in with this user (or one of his army of socks) in the past that would lead him to want to spoof your username? If so, and the account is still active, I'd like to see it also gets blocked -- any help appreciated. Cheers! --Rrburke 23:03, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

I filed the first sock puppetry case against him , and spent a lot of tiem trying to get him banned. I guess he still holds a grudge.Hoponpop69 (talk) 23:12, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Cold War (band)

Hi. You recently nominated this article for speedy deletion per WP:CSD#A7. Digging deep into the reversion history, I discovered that the article was hijacked back in December 2009 with this edit. Whether the original band is more notable is a matter of taste, but I have reverted to the last "good" version and we can take it from there. Favonian (talk) 19:47, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Speedy declined on Mastercastle

Not much of a claim there, but signing a contract with a record label and releasing an album are enough to make it past CSD-A7. Taking it to PROD or AFD might be appropriate, because I agree that they might not be notable enough for inclusion.—Kww(talk) 22:44, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Awaken (band)

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Awaken (band). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:06, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Shitgaze deletion

AfD nomination of Shitgaze

Usage of the "minor edit" tag

Thank you for your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Walt Whitman, as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. AtticusX (talk) 11:56, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Geoff Byrd

There's a claim of significance there, supported by a source. Also, a search of Google News shows there is plenty of coverage available. Please be cautious about speedying articles that have existed for years. Thanks. Paul Erik 02:29, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Red Scare Industries for deletion

The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Red Scare Industries until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Guy (Help!) 19:58, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Gerbilling

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Gerbilling, please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Misplaced Pages:Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Sorry for the generic template for newbies, but it was a newbie move you made.Asher196 (talk) 17:29, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

It was not a newbie move. The source intact referenced my edit, the article was even titled "From Gere to Eternity" and specifically mentions Richard Gere.Hoponpop69 (talk) 17:52, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Jared Lee Loughner

Can we please not do that? Per WP:BLP1E it is unlikely to stay. Prodego 08:08, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Why? This version is sourced, contains information that isn't in the shooting article, and resembles a biography of a living person rather than a stub.Hoponpop69 (talk) 08:12, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

JLL as atheist.

Hello. I think it's different when the AP says, flat out that Loughner is "an ardent atheist" and the Guardian says he is "a vigorous atheist". Neither reporter is quoting JLL's classmates. Isn't this why we rely on "reliable sources" -- at some point a statement becomes more of a fact and less of an opinion? If you see what I mean. --Kenatipo (talk) 19:55, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

That's fine, then just merge that info and source into the current sentence instead of having the article with two similar sentences back to back.Hoponpop69 (talk) 19:57, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Re Jared Loughner's mental state

As I indicated in the edit summary, I think the quote you inserted regarding Loughner's mental state may violate WP:BLP policy. Could you discuss this on the article talk page? I've started a section for this. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:32, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Jared Lee Loughner

On 27 January 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jared Lee Loughner, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Jared Lee Loughner was detained at the Federal Correctional Institution at Phoenix after the 2011 Tucson shooting? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 06:04, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I've declined all your proposed speedy-deletions of record labels just now

I've already asked you not to re-add speedy tags once a speedy has already been declined. I'm not sure if you realize that your persistence with this might start to come across as disruptive. Paul Erik 17:29, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Message from WikiProject Punk music

You are receving this because your user name is listed in Category:WikiProject Punk music members or on our participants list. If you would like to stop these sorts of updates please remove the userbox from your profile and move your name down to the Inactive/former members section of the participants list.
Cheers

--Guerillero | My Talk 01:57, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Mikey Erg

Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: Mikey Erg. The community has decided that all new biographies of living persons must contain a reliable source that supports at least one statement made about the person in the article as per our verifiability policy. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --LaraBot (talk) 00:10, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Hardcore punk's influence on other genres

I noticed your edit to Hardcore punk, specifically at the section "Influence on other genres." Removing referenced information, particularly an entire referenced section of a page, can be considered vandalism.

You commented that "it has nothing to do with anything relating to this article." If you truly feel that way, than discuss it at Talk:Hardcore punk. However, information about the fusion of hardcore punk subgenres and electronic music could not be in a better location. The section "Influence on other genres" appropriately contains information about the fusion of hardcore punk and a variety of other genres. Best wishes and happy editing :o) --♫ Chris-B-Koolio ♫ ... (Talk) 17:39, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Be careful marking edits as minor

Hello, several of your edits on the hardcore page were marked as minor and had no rationale, but these edits were in fact removing bands from the page. According WP:VANDTYPES, marking non-minor edits as minor can be seen as gaming the system and a type of vandalism. I am sure that you meant no ill intent, but please refrain from doing this in the future. Thanks,--3family6 (talk) 21:18, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

AC/DC

It would be good to use a small amount of common sense with the discography section of the AC/DC article. The non-Australian release of High Voltage was not at any point issued or marketed as a compilation, and in terms of almost the entire world, it was unreleased material. I assume you are not saying that High Voltage and Iron Man 2 are essentially the same type of album. High Voltage was the first release outside Australia, and to omit it from a discography is misleading and confusing. Nobody's saying we should add Greatest Hits albums, which is what those small discography sections are supposed to omit. If anything, the two Australian albums should be set aside from the rest, with a proper international discography underneath - that would be the sensible route to take. Bretonbanquet (talk) 20:33, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

I am using common sense, it doesn't matter if it wasn't available in most of the world, it is still old material being reissued, and not a studio album. If you look at other pages discography sections, like The Clash, you don't see the distinct U.S. and U.K. versions of their first album listed.Hoponpop69 (talk) 00:55, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, in that case, obviously - the thing to do is to remove the local issues. I see you just edit war in lieu of a proper discussion. You are wrong, but it's just a case of "I'm right, and the page 'will reflect my views". Top editing. Bretonbanquet (talk) 20:06, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I have started a discussion at Talk:AC/DC#High Voltage in discography section, where a consensus can be established. Your analogy of The Clash is not really the same issue, and your claim that "it doesn't matter if it wasn't available in most of the world" appears to be unsubstantiated. Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:02, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Will you stop edit-warring? I left the discography section at your preferred version to avoid an edit war which you were intent on continuing, and started a discussion. Then you start another edit war at the lead section, over the pettiest thing. Start a discussion if you don't like something, per the guidelines. Bretonbanquet (talk) 10:12, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I just don't see how that at all can be considered a controversial edit. It's simple common sense, to either list all the dates or none of them, as it is currently completely inconsistent. It seems like you are picking on me, and just trying to goad me by reverting non-controversial edits. I find it hard to believe that you honestly think the version listing two exact dates, and years for all the rest, better than a consistent version.Hoponpop69 (talk) 17:53, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

So you keep doing it... read WP:3RR. You keep reverting to your version, away from the established version, despite the fact there's a discussion going on? Anyway, what are you even talking about - "all the rest"? Only three albums have a release date mentioned, and two have the full date - the first and the last. I'm picking on you? When you edit-war against me and others on a daily basis over trivial matters? I'll tell you what's non-controversial, and that's having a full release date for a couple of albums in the lead. I don't care one bit what you find hard to believe. You need to try engaging in discussion instead of reverting to whatever version you like best, not doing both. Bretonbanquet (talk) 18:28, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Please file a complaint. You have openly admitted that you refuse to discuss this issue, and it's clear from this page that I have tried quite hard to get you to discuss this properly. Take it to whatever admin page you want. Bretonbanquet (talk) 13:51, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

AC/DC

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on AC/DC. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

1. Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.