Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Malinaccier (talk | contribs) at 21:48, 9 February 2008 (→Rollback: sign). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

AfD

If you want something deleted, make a list of it here. I like to delete things. Make a list and keep it organized.

• Thruport
• AdJuggler
• Corporate Punishment Records WP:CORP - im now officialy, from this moment onwards on a wikibreak... cya later —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Librarian (talk • contribs) 03:56, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Template Suggestions

I make templates. I like to do that. It passes the time. So, if you want me to make one you can tell me here. Make a list of them. DO NOT make it look crappy. I want it neat and organized.

• Venom Created
• Watain Created
• Deathspell Omega
• Graveland - This one might have too many red links, also might offend your sensibilities. Dunno, do you listen to them (him)?

My talk

This user is a recent changes patroller.

If you make an edit/comment on this page, please sign your name. Also, do NOT edit my userpage without my permission first. I hate it when people delete and add things.

Hi, to start with, it's not a good idea to blank your user page, especially when you have removed non-vandalism criticism/comments. Admins are expected to show transparency in what they do, and most only remove outright obscenity/vandalism.

You are doing a good job with the band-tagging, but imho you need to show a wider range of activities - I think RFA would want to see more antivandalism activity, since you don't need to be an admin to tag bands, and more substantive edits to articles would help to demonstrate your skills and judgement as an editor.

For the reasons above, I don't think you would get through if nominated now, but by all means seek a second opinion, I'm no expert on RFA. If you accept what I've said, why not get back to me in, say 3 weeks time, and I'll look again. Jimfbleak 06:40, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Even so, those are tasks that do not involve admin powers. If you look at the RFA pages, you will see that you will be put though the mill to justify why you want/need the powers, and basically you will need to show that you are active in sorting vandals, and can deal well with difficult contributors. Jimfbleak 15:27, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

It is also incorrect to tag existing articles on wikipedia as speedy when they are not empty. We have a thing on wikipedia called stubs which we all hope can develop into fuller articles. If you have a problem with an article in future I suggest you take it to afd if you know what this means ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ 15:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I suggest you place a prod tag in it or afd an article in future. Things wuill develop eventually/ Thanks ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ 16:00, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes it is a shame that some articles take so long to develop ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ 16:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I've seen your message, but I've got to go out this evening and I'm already knackered, so it'll be tomorrow before I can think coherently. Jimfbleak 18:28, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Looking at Sir Blofield's user page, he seems to be saying "OK go ahead", or are there still issues there? As I understand it, being a stub is not in itself a reason for deletion, however long it has been there, but the fact that there is a stub tag does not in itself protect an article from speedying if it otherwise meets the criteria. That seems to be what you are saying too, am I right? If this is a live issue, it would help me if you could give specific examples where you believe the other user has behaved inappropriately, and i'll try to mediate. Jimfbleak 07:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

There are really only two possibilities for a stub. Either it meets one or more of the CSD criteria, or it doesn't. In the second category would come the thousands of stub species articles generated by a bot this year, which are notable by definition. Assuming that a similar situation doesn't apply, any unsourced or nn stub can be tagged, and I wouldn't normally wait more than 24 hours before deleting. I get the impression that things are quiet at present - if I'm wrong, or if the problem reoccurs, let me know, and I'll see what I can do Jimfbleak 15:50, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Tagging

I just want to ask that you be a bit more careful in tagging band pages for speedy deletion, or deletion in general. I saw that Cold Water Flat was speedily deleted, and it shouldn't have been; I restored it, but taking a look at your edit history, I think it might be worthwhile to check All Music Guide or run a Google search for reviews before nominating something. It's good to know WP:MUSIC well, too. Chubbles (talk) 20:33, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

AMG isn't great, but it's pretty much the most comprehensive sourcing out there for pop music. What you should be concerned about in deletions is not what the state of the article is, but whether or not the artist meets the criteria for inclusion. If a band has a crappy article but is notable, they need to have the article cleaned up, not deleted. Otherwise, you just end up undoing other people's work, which then needs to be redone; it's very inefficient. Chubbles (talk) 16:55, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I know that's true; I've seen that on a bunch of pages I've created. The difference is, AMG doesn't usually write up bios of bands unless they are either noteworthy, or a new band on a well-known label (e.g. pretty much anything signed to Fueled By Ramen gets an AMG writeup before their album even comes out). But a band signed to FBR, pretty much by definition, isn't chump change; they're not a local band looking for press, they're a national band (looking for press), which isn't an uncontroversial speedy deletion topic. Any article that links to an AMG bio should never be speedily deleted, and I hope the admins deny you 100% of the time if you do that. AfD is really the only suitable place for discussing deletion of an article that links to a third-party source like AMG. Chubbles (talk) 17:03, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Again, nothing you've said justifies speedily deleting items with cited sources. Nor does it justify speedily deleting the pages of bands that are, actually, notable, even if they have a lame article. Chubbles (talk) 17:20, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion

Hi! Judging from the messages left here and the speedy that you submitted for Featherstone, Staffordshire (diff), it seems that you might be having some issues with speedy deletion tagging. The speedy deletion criteria, which are listed and explained at WP:CSD, are fairly strict, and only cover a limited number of cases. For instance, on the Featherstone, Staffordshire article, you placed {{db|No sources}} while "No sources" isn't actually a valid speedy deletion criteria. I know that the {{db}} tag lets you fill in your own reasons, as you did, but that's more for when an article falls under multiple criteria listed on WP:CSD. If you do find an article that falls under one of those criteria, you can use the criteria-specific tag. For instance, an article that falls under CSD A7 can be tagged with {{db-a7}}, while another one that falls under CSD G11 can be tagged with {{db-g11}}. Using these predefined templates makes speedy tagging much easier and more accurate. Just remember, not every article qualifies for speedy deletion; those that should be deleted but don't can be marked for PROD or AFD. Let me know on my talk page if you have any questions! Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 19:52, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

The same applies to Medical devices directive. You have marked this for speedy deletion twice, but it doesn't get anywhere near qualifying for any criteria under WP:CSD. Remember that the idea is to create an encyclopedia, not to prevent people from creating one. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:05, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

there was something about a recent article i wrote and its deletion. The article's main purpose is to educate people on the different types of the Emo Sub-Culture, as there are more than just one style of Emo. i didn't know if i should have just edited the original article or create a new one, so I just went with whatever seemed logical at the time. I see your reason for deletion is a good one, and i am prepared to edit the original page to add on this information. it is your choice if you wish to delete the article, and I feel Comfortable either way.--Sorrowx (talk) 06:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sorrowx (talk • contribs)

Cool Templates!

Can you please show me how I can make my own? I listen to a lot of bands, and I want to put them into boxes with sayings just like you did. When I experimented, some worked, some didn't, but I just left my page as it is. I haven't been able to figure it out, and I need some help. Please respond to me on my talk page as soon as you read this message. Thank you! Dark Executioner (talk) 16:18, 28 November 2007 (UTC)Dark Executioner

Thanks, man! My page will be snazzy in no time! Dark Executioner 15:30, 30 November 2007 (UTC)Dark Executioner

13 Winters

When listing 13 Winters for AfD, you re-listed an old AfD from March by mistake. I fixed this for you by creating Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/13 Winters (2nd nomination); if you want, you can state your reasons for deletion there. Ten Pound Hammer • 16:25, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Emily Sander

Sorry, I did not intend to readd "internet harlot", that was a mistake. But there is no reason to delete the rest. It has been widely reported in the mainstream media. WP is not censored. Nobody of Consequence 15:00, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

No. It's reported and can stay. This is an encyclopedia, not a memorial. Nobody of Consequence 15:03, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I removed the link to her website (which was a dead link anyway). Facts about her life that have been widely reported in the media and part of what made her notable to the media in the first place are encyclopedic. Nobody of Consequence 15:07, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, I did remove her website... someone else put it back in. Anyway... Nobody of Consequence 15:08, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

The link to zoeyzane.com is not dead, it works fine. --AnonEMouse 17:43, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Drought

Help me on drought its out of control! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.235.30.80 (talk) 14:44, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

About page protection

Hello there. I see you have twice tried to apply a protection template to a page. Please keep in mind that you have to be an admin in order to do that. If you feel a particular page should be protected, please nominate it on Misplaced Pages:Requests for page protection. Thanks! --Nehwyn (talk) 15:12, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Templates

Hi. I don't understand why you reverted me because when the template is black all these things lay hidden so I thought I was helping. If you can tell me a valid reason why it was worth it to revert me then I'll lay off from that type of editing. −₪ÇɨгcaғucɨҲ₪ 17:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Why are you basing it on code length? Did you even check what changed on the left and right upper corners? I decided to make everything white because the black hides the v, d and e and also the , so I made the font all white. Also, just to warn you, keep on the look out for an ip user that will attack all those black templates and make them "standard". It will probably be one of the next things on his agenda. Btw, thank you for telling me that tba's don't go on the list, I didn't know. −₪ÇɨгcaғucɨҲ₪ 06:42, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

ABC For Kids Video Hits 2

I've declined the speedy tag you placed on ABC For Kids Video Hits 2. The reason is:

about an album, not the artists - isn't covered by CSD A7

For your information, עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 14:41, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Template suggestion

Venom (band) !? surely much better music than immortal (band) —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Librarian (talk • contribs) 06:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

oops, sorry about the sig.. sometimes when i'm in a hurry I forget! lol, I don't listen to Immortal much, but Venom are sort of to Black metal as Slayer is to thrash. -- Ļıßζېấשּׂ~ۘ Ώƒ ﻚĢęخ (talk) 07:24, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Lol, I think you had better check the discography for the venom template =) -- Ļıßζېấשּׂ~ۘ Ώƒ ﻚĢęخ (talk) 00:47, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

B.A.D

I fixed it for you. You just needed to add (2nd nomination) to the end, like this: {{subst:afd1|B.A.D (2nd nomination)}} Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • 02:19, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, well, time will tell.. I've had several that have looked like being deleted but get kept after an influx of inclusionist votes =( -- Ļıßζېấשּׂ~ۘ Ώƒ ﻚĢęخ (talk) 04:59, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Twinkle

How is Twinkle not working for you right now? Just wondering. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • 02:28, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Work!

Good work on AFDing those articles listed on my talk, saves me some work =) -- Ļıßζېấשּׂ~ۘ Ώƒ ﻚĢęخ (talk) 03:07, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

AFD.

You're welcome. Also, Ai kahn spleek Germahn. Das iss easy. :p Nousernamesleft 03:34, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I actually really do know a very elementary level of German, and I can tell that you said "if you speak German, what am I saying?" or something to that effect. (I don't understand all the words; I'm inferring that from the words I do understand) I can't understand the second sentence at all. Nousernamesleft 18:44, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I actually really do know a very elementary level of German, and I can tell that you said "if you speak German, what am I saying?" or something to that effect. (I don't understand all the words; I'm inferring that from the words I do understand) I can't understand the second sentence at all. Nousernamesleft 18:44, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

goldmine of deletes

most will be per wp:corp = Category:New Zealand record labels , I checked the first three, none of which were notable... there is also an attached list which might have more, but most are duplications-- Ļıßζېấשּׂ~ۘ Ώƒ ﻚĢęخ (talk) 04:35, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA

OK, I've been through your contributions, and I'll nom you (may not be today, other things to do first). Good luck. 06:22, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

It's done! You need to agree to nom and start jumping the hurdles here (counted the tildes this time!) Jimfbleak (talk) 06:52, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, you have plenty to answer after Jimfbleak (talk) 07:38, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

• Sorry if that felt like a "kick in the nuts". Almost nobody has ever passed RfA with only ~1000 edits (give or take however many you had on other accounts/IPs). You do seem to edit in good faith, but the experience just isn't there yet. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • 14:35, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

• I've gone ahead and closed your RfA as "withdrawn by candidate", as per your recent comment. Just make solid contributions to the project, and you should breeze through the next one. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:13, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello. You might want to read User:Dlohcierekim/standards for some idea of what I look for in an RfA nom and RfA in general. (Just my opinion. Other people will have different criteria.) Don't let this get you down. I think you show good potential. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 16:02, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Ugh You might want to space them over the next 3 months and seek an editor review before seeking RfA again. Take time to smell the roses and all. Cheers and happy editing. Dlohcierekim 16:23, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah sorry dude, I decided not to vote because it was looking fairly obvious which way it was going to me =(, however, you should adjust your preferences so that it wont save the page you're working on until you've added a comment... - I've done it, because i never used to leave a comment =). I think in a couple of months if you go for RFA again, you'll probably get it, I myself have no interest in administration, but power to you! =) -- Ļıßζېấשּׂ~ۘ Ώƒ ﻚĢęخ (talk) 23:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Airy Points

Just a quick note about withdrawal: Yes, random people should never remove AFD tags from articles, BUT the person who nominates an article for deletion has every right to withdraw the whole process. Often, an article goes to AFD, then users 'fix' the problem, so withdrawal is the proper thing to do. In this case, it was an obscure and confusing topic, but once notability is cleary established, it is perfectly acceptable to withdraw and give rationale, ie: "Withdrawing nom, nobability has been established". You are not obligated to, and I am not saying you should or shouldn't. I am just saying it is a perfectly normal thing to do under certain circumstances and no admin would oppose it. Technically, you have the right to withdraw your own nomination of ANY process (speedy tag, etc.) and then someone else can renominate it if they disagree. I've been wrong about a nom once or twice and withdrawn them simply so others won't waste their time 'proving' something that is already proven. No biggie, just wanted to pass that on for general purposes. Pharmboy (talk) 15:22, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Adminship

I believe I have the grasp of policies, but I just don't have the numbers yet. How long, do you suggest, that I wait until my next submission?

I understand that you believe you have a firm grasp, but the key is to show that you do. Participation in deletion discussions is a common way for non-admins to showcase their knowledge, by supporting or opposing deletion on the grounds of Misplaced Pages policy and guidelines.

However, again, there's more to a good admin candidate than just the numbers themselves. For my personal standards, see User:EVula/opining/RfA ramblings#Requirements. For example, aside from a fairly low edit count, I'm not (after just looking at your edit breakdown) seeing a particularly high level of involvement; just a couple of months ago (October), you only had 84 edits. I like seeing consistent activity over a moderately long period of time. Admins are also expected to communicate with other editors, either to explain to unruly users why what they're doing is wrong or explaining various admin activities (such as explaining why they've closed a contentious AfD, etc).

Generally speaking, I'd recommend at least 4 to 6 months between a failed RfA and another attempt, but also keep in mind that, if after 4 to 6 months the concerns haven't been addressed, the time between attempts won't matter very much. EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:16, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Gavin Collins

Any user is entitled to add tags, although it could be vandalism if they were persistently not justified. Most of the tags are are not asking for speedy deletion, but are asking for references to establish notability and other improvements. I saw only one example where the tagging was possibly harsh. Having said that, I picked up genuine vandalism by users "Gavin the loser" and "Gavin the colon" who were systematically reverting the tagging, so the exercise was useful, and I've blocked them. Jimfbleak (talk) 07:11, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

swallowing shit

where did you get their albums? what do they sound like? they good? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.162.175.120 (talk) 01:43, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Diana Barnato Walker

I fully intend to expand the article on this wartime woman pilot, and need more than just one minute to do so after first creating the article! My contributions are always properly researched, which takes an appropriate length of time! RuthAS (talk) 04:30, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

References for Action for Blind People

I added some references to Action for Blind People. --Eastmain (talk) 02:09, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Diana Barnato Walker - (2)

I dont agree with your remarks - many Wiki articles after various additions are far less weighty than my starting piece. Its a fair start. I can and will add to it after due research and consideration. The length (number of words/letters) is less important then quality of content. RuthAS (talk) 11:13, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

My previous contributions have not been so marked. I dont see how its possible within less than one minute for an article to be properly judged. Please tell me how to mark an article as 'under construction'. RuthAS (talk) 13:45, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for telling me about the 'under construction' tag. After a bit of a struggle, I've learned to apply it - to Walker - but only where strictly necessary! I'll try to be a 'good girl' from here - but my strength is in contributing worthwhile content - not in formats, tags etc etc! RuthAS (talk) 14:20, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Block

It's done Jimfbleak (talk) 15:59, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

soo, why did you delete the El Cid site? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yobolehobo (talk • contribs) 05:56, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Block etc

Also blocked as vandalism only. Keep plugging away at the vandal/nonsense bashing, looks OK so far, and try again as you suggest. Jimfbleak (talk) 06:33, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Musical glasses

Hello, Undead. I declined the speedy and turned it into a redirect as it turned out to be a term for something we already have an article on. 16:00, 5 February 2008 (UTC) Dlohcierekim Deleted? 16:11, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Drat. too many ~'s! Cheers, Dlohcierekim Deleted? 16:11, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

RfA

i'd be glad to.

For now, User:Dlohcierekim/On RfA has info about how I view RfA, including my (obsolete term) "standards".

In your previous RfA, I opposed for a possible lack of dispute resolution understanding. Basically, one should be able to demonstrate or express an understanding of avoid edit warring, seeking a third opinion, RfC, questioning at WP:AN/I. AGF, etc. I've been fortunate in not having been drawn into any real disagreements, but sometimes opposes will come because the nom was not in a conflict and is untried.

I've seen otherwise fine noms not succeed because of one misplaced CSD tag. Once a nom did not succeed because he'd A7'd a misspelled name about an African footballer with content like, "he's the man and is really tall," or some other gibberish. Turned out he was a top man in his sport in that country.

Be careful with the G1 tags. We seem to be using them as a catchall to SNOW articles that would not fit a CSD category but would be WP:SNOW deleted at AFD anyway. Sometimes it's necessary to leave the article alone and then come back to it. A lot of new editors have a hard time writing a decent first stub. (My first stub was speedied as empty. Oops.) Hopefully, they will fix the article in a few minutes. Other things to watch out for are scientific names and mangled translations of articles about notable subjects. It's usually better to take a few minutes to research and edit then to lose an article due to he lack of experience of the creator.

Always take the time to welcome the creator of a speediable article and warn them of the CSD tag. I really got bitten on my first try. Fortunately, I tend to be a miserable, stubborn SOB, and after I said a few razzlesnatching razzlesnatches I went on about my business. A welcome is a subtle way of taking the sting out and giving them one more opportunity to please read the (expletive deleted) instructions. Notifying them on the CSD helps them understand what went wrong and how to fix it. Much better than the "how dare you create an empty article," I got.

Hope that helps.

Dlohcierekim Deleted? 18:46, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

If your not doing so already, take part in the RfA discussions. That will make your name familiar to other RfA participants and you can learn from the experiences of others. Hope that helps. Cheers, Dlohcierekim Deleted? 18:46, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

OH, yes-- article creation and improvement. It helps if you can poit to a number of articles (even stubs) you've created or improved. I prowl the unsorted stubs and the G1's looking for articles to fix up. Dlohcierekim Deleted? 18:52, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Templates

I'd hardly consider it redesigning or personal preference. What your saying implies you have ownership of a template, which goes against the principles of a wiki, and I changed it to a standardised template with standard colour scheme so I really wouldn't consider it a personal preference or solely your choice to make. — Balthazar 23:03, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Also I think that this template is really pointless, it links 3 relevant pages together (2 of which lack the template) and NAVBOX states that red links and unlinked text (which constitute most of this template) should be avoided. — Balthazar 01:34, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Even still iv seen nothing saying that they shouldn't be changed or that they should be black, and black makes it impossible to see the v • d • e links on them. And I don't see how the Watain template really helps navigation or as reminder to what needs to be done, its only on one page that already lists everything that they lack; it may become useful in the future but at the moment it really doesn't add to the article. — Balthazar 21:53, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

The template that you were using in your templates has an option to change the colour of the vde links, that iv only just noticed. And there's a wikiproject that is attempting to standardise musician templates, that includes background colour (and the only yellow navboxes I've seen have been on solo singer articles which are supposed to be yellow according to the same project and the closest thing to red I've seen is on the genre pages, which aren't really directly relevant to this). And no, all I could argue with it is that navboxes that only go to pages that are already listed on the pages they appear on are useless. — Balthazar 23:58, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Removing Speedy Deletion Tags and Partyflock

After I removed your speedy delete tag from Partyflock, you (signing as undeath) left a message on my page saying "Do not remove speedy tags. Only admins should do that." I'm not quite sure where you got the notion that only admins were allowed to remove speedy tags. Anybody can--as stated in the first screen of WP:SPEEDY. I do it when I think something shouldn't be deleted. I think you'll agree if you look at the De Telegraaf piece I quoted on the talk page that partyflock is notable. Regards--Wageless (talk) 13:56, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I didn't add the hangon tag, I just deleted the speedy tag. I assume that the creator of the article added the hangon tag, as he's supposed to do if he disagrees with what you've done. The speedy tag says "If you created this page and you disagree with its proposed speedy deletion, please add: hangon directly below this tag."--Wageless (talk) 14:13, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I think you really should take a closer look at the text of the tag. Here's what it said yesterday on partyflock: "If this page does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, or you intend to fix it, please remove this notice, but do not remove this notice from pages that you have created yourself." I didn't create the page--I just didn't think that partyflock met the criteria for speedy deletion, having found some articles in De Telegraaf on LexisNexis. Ergo I deleted the tag. Perfectly reasonable thing to do. Regards--Wageless (talk) 14:41, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Yup. Wageless is correct. Dlohcierekim Deleted? 00:09, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Your review

I placed it Here. Hope it helps. If you have any questions, please let me know. cheers, Dlohcierekim Deleted? 00:08, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Armageddon's evolution - neuthrone.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Armageddon's evolution - neuthrone.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Misplaced Pages constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 01:57, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I've added a fair-use template to the image page, this should ensure it is alright. Best wishes, DuncanHill (talk) 04:18, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Looks as if it's OK now Jimfbleak (talk) 06:29, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, you're not being helpfull

DOn't you think it's a bit rude and inconsiderate to say that 2 years of musical effort are "un-notable" or "insignificant"? What's wrong with helping a musician, ah? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mens Rea Band (talk • contribs) 18:29, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Mens Rea

Re your message: Well, he's headed that way, but not quite yet. I just left him a second to last warning and then I noticed that another editor did the same thing. I'm trying to cut him some slack since he is a new editor. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 18:32, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Re your message: Yeah, I noticed that. I deleted it for the third time (I didn't delete the first one). We'll see if he stops or not. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 18:46, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Re your message: No, I don't have anything else to add. I think you pretty much covered it. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 21:26, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

But we have done that

You wrote that when we your a country, than we deserve a wikipedia page, and we have! Just this last fall we came to The States from Israel for 8 shows! And since you say you've been a part of a band, you should know it is a huge step. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mens Rea Band (talk • contribs) 18:36, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Of course I can prove it!

We played 8 clubs in NYC, including the famous Kenny's Castaways, you've probably heard of it, it is where Aerosmith and Springsteen practically started their careers! And I for one think that saying that a label is a minimum condition for a band to have a wikipedia page is wrong. You know well enough that not everything that's signed is any good, whereas on the other hand, many indie bands are pretty great

Your suggestion isn't that easy to apply

We are Israelis, we can't just arrive in an American country, Besides, we have toured the entire Israel, and have a song of ours released in an American Compilation. I think it's notable Sorry, couldn't find the tilde sign —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mens Rea Band (talk • contribs) 18:54, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

• When somebody cares so much about having the article here, and the article is decently written, and it's already been written, what harm is it to leave it in place rather than deleting? Even Jimbo Wales is an "inclusionist." --AStanhope (talk) 22:35, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

• I feel that there is so much good work and indisputably positive and productive work to be done on the Misplaced Pages that deleting articles that have already been written and that have editors who care about them is a misdirection of resources. --AStanhope (talk) 22:41, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

albums

I have no idea whether For Those Who Don't Believe is notable or appropriate for a WP article, but I can tell it does not meet the specifications for speedy A1, lack of context;. it's a recording by a named group of musicians, by a named distributor, and that is the context. Please read WP:CSD for the explanation of the deletion criteria.DGG (talk) 22:51, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Undead warrior! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. β 17:25, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I can give you places and names of venues where we performed

don't have any reviews on shows from 3rd party. I do have some articles made on us, but they're in Hebrew

I can give you places and names of venues where we performed

don't have any reviews on shows from 3rd party. I do have some articles made on us, but they're in Hebrew~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mens Rea Band (talk • contribs) 21:44, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle
• Rollback can only be used to revert vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback may be removed at any time.

I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, just leave me a message on my talk page. Happy editing! Malinaccier (talk) 21:48, 9 February 2008 (UTC)