66.226.32.195

66.226.32.195 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) seems to highlight a bug in your antivandal software. I already reverted and warned. You might want to pass this on to the programmer. Agathoclea 16:43, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Miramax Films

Hi

I wonder if I may ask your advice. I - along with some others - have been trying to add a little info here and there to the Miramax Films article. And there appears to be one (or maybe two) anon users who keep coming and deleting anything new. Large chunks of text. No rhyme or reason offered. Some rv that you did yesterday got undone by the main offender. Someone restored it - and bingo it gets deleted yet again. The text is not remotely controversial. It's all non-contentious factual material. I don't know if this repeated deleting is considered vandalism. Or just poor manners. But there is no attempt to discuss on Talk Page. .Just wholesale deletions. Any ideas how to handle this? Thanks . Davidpatrick 22:11, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Todays FA rvin'

You beat me to it there, this is kinda fun although I'll probably get fired. Oh well...--KaptKos 14:57, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Kurt Cobain

I have NOT vandalized the page "Kurt Cobain". In my opinion, if you must have a picture of Cobain with fellow Nirvana members Krist Novoselic and Dave Grohl, you should note them. If you disagree, it would be wise if you licensed a picture of Cobain on his own, not with either Novoselic or Grohl.89.241.5.128 18:01, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

The edit the anon is questioning had nothing to do with image captions. The user, in fact, blanked a large section of the article in question and received a vandalism warning for doing so. Anger22 17:21, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Avro Arrow

Thank you for helping revert the inadvertant. I was editing the very lengthy piece when I accidently made a mistake and eliminated the main part of the article. Thanks again for correcting my bonehead mistake. Bzuk 12:22, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Buzz Shearman

Hi, about ten days ago you left a message on bretonbanquet's talk page (User talk:Bretonbanquet), and I removed the sentence about shearman and scott. I searched for a source but i did't find anything and now i see that message. I will add that text again, sry for disturbing. No-Bullet 00:36, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Poll at Syd Barrett

I have a poll going at the Talk:Syd Barrett page. Would you like to participate and help us solve an issue? TheQuandry 01:33, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Anger

Hey Anger, thank you for supporting my recent RfA. It finished with an amazing final tally of 160/4/1. I really appreciate your support. Cheers, Sarah Ewart (Talk) 10:38, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

'ES-355s'?

Lifeson never owned a 355 until late 1976 when he got his white one it from the Gibson factory in Kalamazoo MI. Alex used a tobacco sunburst ES-335 that he bought in 1968 for those early albums not a 355. The guitar pictured in the Caress of Steel sleeve is his a ES-335.

Over the years Alex has owned the following ES type guitars:

ES-335 ES-345 (2) ES-355 ES-369

The ES-335 was damaged by a falling PA horn at a gig in 1978 on the AFTK, Nassau Colisseum, Long Island, NY. His original red EDS-1275 was also damaged and replaced by the white EDS-1275 that he owned up until the start of the Vapor Trails tour. The ES-335 was repaired and retired from the road. Lifeson still uses the 335 in his home studio.

The white ES-355 was modified for the Signals tour to have a gold Kahler tremolo system installed. The guitar was retired from the road after that tour and was subsequently restored back to original condition in the mid 1990s. The ES-355 guitar has since seen road duty on both the Vapor Trails tour (2002) and the R30 tour (2004).

Alex Lifeson used Hiwatt amplifiers on the AFTK tour in 1977-78 and again for the Hemispheres tour in 1978-79. Alex used Hiwatts and 1 Fender twin in 1980 on the Permanent Waves tour.

All the information I have posted concerning the equipment history up to 1980 is all easily confirmed and verified by the May 1980 Guitar Player interview with Alex Lifeson.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.151.74.76 (talk • contribs)

Good info. I misread the whole line about which era the 335 was used.(in my vandalproof window I just caught the 'red' text...my goof) It is common for his 355 use to be incorrectly changed en-masse to 335 throughout Misplaced Pages...I should have read more carefully. I knew the history of the original tobacco Gibson. I have Steve Gett's "Success Under Pressure" which tells the tale of the 335. Anger22 01:17, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Christmas

I don't see what I did wrong. I was trying to prevent vandalism. I didn't realise the other parts of the vandalism, so that went through. Sorry I tried to prevent vandalism. --67.177.244.157 03:45, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

cleared Anger22 03:53, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Nishkid64's RfA thanks

Stevie Ray Vaughan talk

Thanks for the cleanup but just a note that you removed a legitimate message. No harm done, but that can be considered vandalism by some. --Ortzinator 15:06, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

When I gave that a quick read it sounded more like a post from a teen chat room. It was edging towards breaking the "talk about the article, not the subject" Wiki-rule for talk pages so I figured it could be cleaned out. Either way it's harmless and can stick. Cheers and take care! Anger22 16:18, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Neil Peart

I'll keep a beady eye on it, but I'm not so active over the w/e's so I'm afraid you may have to get your hands dirty;). If it happens again, in the manner and tone of the last time, maybe we should point him towards Misplaced Pages:Citing sources and Misplaced Pages:Civility, Misplaced Pages:No personal attacks and Misplaced Pages:Etiquette? might help. He's a newbie using sources, afterall, just not in the right way...--KaptKos 07:31, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Hang on...just seen your edit comment. Not a newbie then?--KaptKos 07:40, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

reversion of reload page

You reverted the addition of "Alternative Metal" category to the ReLoad (album) page. Why? It seems valid to me. Debivort 23:18, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

That's a topic that's been beat to death on many talk pages and it's been rv'd countless times going back long before I started editing Misplaced Pages. Plain and simple...there's nothing alt-metal about it. No Tool comparisons, no Rammstein comparisons, No Primus comparisons, No Mr Bungle comparisons, No Faith no More comparisons, no NiN comparisons...etc. consensus has always leaned toward leaving it out. Anger22 23:33, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Admin?

Well, what do you think? Ready to give WP:RfA a whirl? With 11000+ edits, 7 months of experience, an eye for maintenance work, and a cool temperament, I think you're a great candidate. Let me know. --Spangineer (háblame) 16:08, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

You can count on my vote, thats for sure--KaptKos 16:16, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Golly gee whiz gosh, I'm humbled :) . I really do appreciate the vote of confidence...but...right now my work schedule is a bit hectic. Popping in and out to rv vandals is easy(I can do that in my sleep). But I don't really have time to focus, Q&A wise, on an RfA. Things should cool down in a week or three. I will have more free time will give it a go then. Sound OK? Cheers and again thanks! Anger22 16:37, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Alrighty, I'll ask again toward the end of the month =). --Spangineer (háblame) 16:56, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

not me!

Hello

I didn't edit the Elton John page!

Oh really! If that is the case then how do you explain your edit to the article? It looks like vandalism to me. Anyone else think it shouldn't be called vandalism? Anger22 17:55, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Led Zeppelin

If fair use on images requires one to only use images from videos themselves in articles about that video then there is no need to delete images that are not from that ""video" (whatever that means). Yet you deleted almost every image including concert images that has been packaged and aired outside of that movie. Please discuss before reverting all of my hard work. Thanks. 71.76.219.92 17:08, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Only images violating fair use were removed. No discussion req'd for Wiki-policy vios Anger22 17:22, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

That's not true. Only the two photos from the song remains the same could possibly be misconstrued as violations, and even they are probably acceptable. From Misplaced Pages's policy:

"Images There are a few categories of copyrighted images where use on Misplaced Pages has been generally approved as likely being fair use when done in good faith in Misplaced Pages articles involving critical commentary and analysis. Such general approval must be seen in the light of whether a free image could replace the copyright image instead.

Cover art. Cover art from various items, for identification and critical commentary (not for identification without critical commentary). Team and corporate logos. For identification. See Misplaced Pages:Logos. Stamps and currency. For identification. Other promotional material. Posters, programs, billboards, ads. For critical commentary. Film and television screen shots. For critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television. Screenshots from software products. For critical commentary. Paintings and other works of visual art. For critical commentary, including images illustrative of a particular technique or school. Publicity photos. For identification and critical commentary. See Misplaced Pages:Publicity photos."

Album covers, posters, and concert photos clearly fall under this.

You can pick one for the specific section dedicated to the vid(or down in the filmography section). But oversaturation of pics will bloat the article even further....and it's already way too big to begin with....see WP:MoS. If the article gets an FA push, the image fluff and the individual article sections will be the first things to go(all the album info is already available in the album articles themselves) Hope that helps. Cheers! Anger22 17:38, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

So now it's a question of the quantity of pics? If that's the case, why were you deleting everything? Your getting a bit wishy-washy. Have you looked at the articles on the albums themselves--they're crap, so I question your assertion that all of the information can be found there; I wish it was, but it isn't.71.76.219.92 17:45, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

There should be a dedicated LZ project the same way we have one for The Beatles and Pink Floyd. Something you could undertake maybe? I am not being wishy-washy( I haven't heard that term for 30 years) Images tagged as screen shots are pretty cut and dried. I gave you the PUI link if you feel they should be investigated. I saw LZ twice in 1973 and again in 1975. My only goal is to see them get a good article similar to the Pink Floyd or Rush articles. But not at the expense of Wikipolicy. Cheers! Anger22 17:53, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I would love to be part of such a project. As for the Pink Floyd article, they have album covers strewn all over the place (stacked on top of each other practically. and it's very disorganized. The LZ article might not be the greatest article on this website but I think it's "good" one to say the least (nice and tight with organized headings, some solid analysis), and as you can see on the talk page, it was rated A-Class. i must say I still don't understand your logic when it comes to screenshots. The general image policy states that screenshots are usually acceptable when used for artistic analysis. 71.76.219.92 18:09, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

The Pink Floyd articles are in a bit of a shambles(vandalism patrol keeps me distracted) Plus, Dharm(the king of the Pink Floyd project and the one who got the PF article FA'd...almost singled handedly) has been on a Wikibreak since July....he is definitely missed. It didn't help that MightyMoose22 quit Misplaced Pages completely(fed up with policy breakers and vandals) Not sure whose holding the fort over there now. I was at the PF Montreal show when Waters spit on the drunken fan. I'd hate to see that article spiral. Thankfully the Rush article is patrolled(hawked if you will) by several dedicated editors. It won't have any trouble when it comes up for review. And it was sad, but expected, when the Beatles lost it's FA status. I am still not sure how it got the star when it only had 4 citations??? But it got tagged when Wiki was still young so I guess it was just "as good as it gets" when it went to a vote first time in. It'll get that way again. But it'll take time. Get yourself a proper handle so it'll give you more editing options. IP's come under a lot of scrutiny at the CVU(of which I am not a listed member) Cheers! Anger22 18:26, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I was surveying the Beatles article yesterday, doing a bit of cleanup, and I'm considering doing a major overhaul. Maybe you could help me if you know a bit about them. I really do think a solid history section is the foundation of any good article of that kind, and that's something the Beatles article is lacking--the info is there but terribly scattered. Of the listed articles, I think Led Zeppelin is the only one that comes close to proper FA status right now--a real shame. I'd like to work on the Pink Floyd one, too. About getting a username, the funny thing is, I already have one; it's just that I forget to sign in every time. 71.76.219.92 18:36, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I watch the Beatles article for vandalism. If I see a series of valid edits I try to give them special attention that they aren't turfed by a "School IP with nothing better to do". Better to ask the regular editors to push for a combined cleanup effort.(There are a lot of familiar names that pop up over there) All I can say is: citations, citations, citations and no original research. If it doesn't have a good external ref...it won't(and shouldn't) stay + "O.R." just makes an article read like a junior high school book report. I will try to help when I can. Good luck! Anger22 18:47, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

With that article, reformatting is all I can do really--all the info is there as far as I can see but I wouldn't know how to go about finding references for all of it. I'm working on it right now, just changing the topic headings an merging a few things. 71.76.219.92 19:02, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Bot Editing

Hi, I'd be happy to show you what it is, but i'm not 100% sure what it means. Since I apparently do it, I'd be happy to explain it once I know what your refering to. Cheers. 75pickup (talk · contribs)

Rush

damn your faster fingers, i was attempting the same revert. I'd like to thank you for watching that page carefully to prevent any fallacious info about such a great band from getting loose inthe world, LOL. ThuranX 03:27, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

There's lots of dedicated editors watching that article. I just got to it first. Anger22 03:29, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

RE:How are things?

Things are very good, thank you very much. Nice to see I haven't been forgotten completely :P. I've pulled back into being a wiki-gnome for a while, as school and life have awoken from their slumber and are now doing their best to make life hell. Anyway, I'll keep a lookout for your RFA and be sure to give you a full thumbs up for the great Wikipedian you are. I'd also like to give you props for recruiting more disciples to our cause. Cheers, good luck with Barney and TINC, Master of Puppets 03:47, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the support. I am in no rush to leap into an RfA right now. VandalProof and popups are coming in handy right now. I am very busy at work so being able to "one button it" is about all I have time for...other than talking to you...and the odd guitarist project article. Cheers! Anger22 04:02, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

PS: School is more important than Misplaced Pages. Shh I didn't say that. Anger22 04:36, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

LOTR Talk Page revert

Hola. Just curious as to why you removed my LOTR Talk Page comments today. In what sense did you take my comments as "trolling"? Darcyj 04:25, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

My error...sorry. We must have been editing at the same time. The edit I was trying to rv was this one which you can see was definitely trolling. I apologise for you getting caught in the loop. By all means restore your text. Cheers and take care....and again sorry. Anger22 04:40, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

No worries! Thanks for the quick reply, and keep up the good work. Darcyj 05:09, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Message from Pink Floyd vandal

I didn't edit the Pink Floyd page. I've never even visited their page before. Now leave me alone.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.118.205.27 (talk • contribs)

The edit the above user is whining about is this one No question as to what king of edit it was. Anger22 09:49, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Possible Glitch

Hello, I'm the user who spoke to you yesterday about the Led Zep article. There's something wierd going on over there, and I figured I might as well ask you about it. Every time I try to edit the article, it doesn't register in the history of the article; also, all of today's edits have been completely erased from the history section--no record of them at all, just gone--and it's now listing yesterday's edits as occuring on October 5th, which is just plain wrong. I made at least a dozen edits today and now there is no evidence that they ever occured (note that the last edits it lists by me were actually done yesterday, but are listed as occuring today). the strange this is these edits were registered in the history just a couple hours ago. I don't know if this has to do with the articles length (65 k) or what. Maybe you could take a look and maybe contact some admins (if something is truly wrong) since I'm a relatvely inexperienced user: Led Zeppelin. Try editing the article and see if it'll register in the history. This is really puzzling me. Thanks. 71.76.219.92 20:45, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

???Not sure what you're seeing? I see quite a list of edits by you today. Perhaps just a simple browser error? Anger22 22:58, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Rushian rv-olution

The persistance of this guy is a bit unusual though, isn't it? Now if you were an admin you'd be able to instantly block any ip making that edit...--KaptKos 13:17, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Instantly? I don't know that I would want to abuse any tools. There are several admins already rv'ing the users edits. If they haven't put him on the block then there must be a reason. My name is Anger, but my disposition is far from that. I am only mean to my employees :) (And we have 1500 of them from coast to coast). Cheers Anger22 14:01, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Steve Howe

No problem at all. The offensive edit summary quickly caught my attention. Not to mention I also feel the current Howe pick is just fine. Cheers. PJM 16:58, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Buddy Holly & interproject coöperation

Hi, thanks for the heads-up about the Buddy Holly article. I'll try to get to it soon.

On the topic of "inter-project coöperation", I want to say, I'm as much (or as little) a member of the guitarist project as I am the musicians project (and vice versa). But my primary concern is the overall quality of Misplaced Pages--not just musicians or guitarists articles. I think I've addressed your concerns about the musical artist infobox on the guitarist project talk page, but you haven't responded, so I don't know if you have more issues, or if things are fine now. I simply want more inter-article consistency, but I'm willing to be pretty flexible in how it happens. I'm willing to develop a new, alternative infobox just for the guitarists project, if that's what you'd prefer. But at the moment, things are stalled basically on your objections, and I don't know how to move forward without more information on what, precisely, you're objecting to. I understand if you're busy, but I really would like to get more feedback when and if you have a chance. Thanks. Xtifr _tälk 18:27, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time on the Buddy Holly article(pending). I didn't really have time to reflect on the last series of comments on the WPG talk page. I was hoping others would express some thoughts so we could move forward, together...working for one positive goal which is...as you put it..."overall quality of Misplaced Pages". I can't say anymore as to my thoughts on "inter-article consistency" that I haven't already expressed. 3 Beatles have musician boxes...1 has a "G" box. 3 Led Zeppelin members have(or will have) musician boxes....1 has a "G" box etc. Which is, I believe, how it should be. I am certainly for expansion of the current guitarist infobox...MINUS...the colours. Why...already this week it's been expanded to include an image caption....Oooooooo WOW!!!(sarcasm!). It's not much...but right now key project members(incl. myself) are either on Wikibreak...or busy with other Wiki issues so we don't have much input as to on what to to with it next. I, for one wouldn't mind seeing a "other occupations" line in it. Not so much to include other mucial instruments played but more along the lines of producer or film director or...whatever. Jeff "Skunk" Baxter is not only an famous guitarist...he is also an anti-terrorism expert for the US gov. Steve Morse is not just an amazing guitarist...he is also an airline pilot. The current infobox has no place for including that. But maybe it could? Before any further changes are made I would like to wait for Andy, the admin who created the guitarist project, to come back into the fold. He is currently on a much needed Wiki-break due to very important personal issues that, of course, are much more important than this little hobby. Maybe once he returns we can then set a path on what to do next. Cheers and take care....and again...thanks for "Buddy". Anger22 18:50, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

60's underground musician's

As a former "underground" musician I thought it might be interesting to list some of the artist's who were around in the mid to late 1960's and some of those who made it into the spotlight,like the "Grateful Dead","Sweetwater","Jefferson Airplane"and those who fell a little short, but still contributed to the "Cause" and the "Times" like myself. However, everytime I've tried to enter anything in I get a message from -guinnog that "this is nonsense" and it's removed, it is kind of insulting "I Was There"-I doubt that He was!! Woodstockric 02:21, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

By your own admission..."fell a little short"... falls under Misplaced Pages policies: WP:NN and WP:BIO which cover any/all non-notable vanity additions. It's not worth the edit war. You even removed valid content in your edits, which is vandalism for which you received a warning...from me. A couple more of those and you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Try and add legitimate content(that's verifiable) and you will stay out of trouble. Oh...and I was there too. Anger22 02:32, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Judas Priest Plural??

Why is Judas Priest plural, is that just how you guys do it in the UK? No offense, but that's driving me crazy. Wi-king 07:36, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm not in the UK but...in international English band names are treated as plural. It's only the US where they are treated as singular although, here in Canada, that sometimes rubs off on us. On Misplaced Pages, UK subject=UK English, US subject=US English. Hope that helps. Anger22 10:28, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

image problems

The first user you mentioned (User:SEGA) seems to have taken a break with the images, and I just left a note for User:Soheil b (after deleting all those OrphanBot notes; I doubt they're helpful after receiving 5 of them). Hopefully that does the trick; thanks for letting me know. --Spangineer (háblame) 03:20, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

For your adding the James-Honeyman Scott article to WikiProject Guitarists. I added an info box the other day.

SFloridaMusic

Re: back

I am still really busy but I am going to start trying to check in on a daily basis. You have done awesome work on assessment! Have you seen this report? It's a useful tool also for seeing when an article gets moved out of the project, because it will tell you that something was "Start class" or whatever, and then was moved "out". I will try to start hitting the unassessed ones this week. --Aguerriero (talk) 19:43, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

E is done (and cripes what a mess the EVH article is...)  :) --Aguerriero (talk) 22:42, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Guitarists Newsletter - Issue II - October 2006

The October 2006 issue of the WikiProject Guitarists newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Aguerriero (talk) 20:39, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thanks, I'm humbled! Anger22 22:37, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

You are so welcome man, I am a blueser how about you (Death to Pop Fluff!--Seadog.M.S 22:45, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

I am actully a very serious guitarist I am starting to become pretty popular around my area, you seem very cool however please add your username to my friends list on my userpage (if you don't mind)--Seadog.M.S 23:19, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Just wanted to send a quick note of thanks for your support in my RfA. :-) I really appreciate it! Best, Irongargoyle 03:09, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Idea

I think in the guitarist infobox it should show the tunings that the guitarist used the most. For SRV it would say 1/2 step down and for Eric Clapton it would say standard tuning and for EVH it could be Drop D or whatever he uses. Please let me know what you think of this idea.--Seadog.M.S 16:38, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Guitarist infobox

Xtifr has left some remarks at the Guitarist infobox discussion and I replied. I have tried to be more clear about some reasons for not integrating the two infoboxes or substituting them en masse; I hope you don't mind that I sort of spoke for you.

Got those practice answers ready for me yet? :) --Aguerriero (talk) 20:11, 11 October 2006 (UTC)