User talk:Freshacconci/Archive 10

Just when it would come in handy …

I finished the first round of basic changes to Performance Art. I still wonder how empty the englisch speaking wikipedia is. You seem to be the only living being around the article. From the rest of "Performing Wikipedia" the only feedback is silence. I would be extremely pleased, if you have a look over what I've done. I wish you a nice time anyway, without too much electrosmog ;-) --fluss (talk) 18:54, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 April 12#Susanne Kessler

Hi Freshacconci. Because you participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Susanne Kessler, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 April 12#Susanne Kessler. Would you help new user Leda47 (talk · contribs) source Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Susanne Kessler so it may be returned to the mainspace? Thank you, Cunard (talk) 05:11, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Beatles genres

Was there a consensus that the current genres for The Long and Winding Road and Michelle should be kept? If not, there was no good reason to revert my edits. You say that I should source genre changes, but the genres there are unsourced as well! So who are you to tell me I should source my edits? 67.80.144.146 (talk) 21:36, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

You're changing it so the onus is on you to discuss it and find sources. freshacconci talktalk 21:39, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Will do. Sorry... 67.80.144.146 (talk) 21:51, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

And welcome back to Wikipedia! :) 67.80.144.146 (talk) 21:53, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

In My Life

Hi, you left a message on my talk page referencing the use of "reliable sources". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joyage (talk • contribs) 13:06, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, and? All claims need to be sourced. What you wrote was unsupported speculation. freshacconci talktalk 14:02, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Never mind, I just checked on your Reliable Sources policy. Thanks. Joyage (talk) 14:16, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Lennon vandal

Greeting, can you do something with 69.231.228.193? He's erroneously changing all Lennon releases. Thanks. Hotcop2 (talk) 23:18, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Dear Freshacconci Lifebaka On 13:07, 3 February 2011 at the Tellus Audio Cassette Magazine page at http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Tellus_Audio_Cassette_Magazine removed the covers of all of the issues of Tellus. I think that this is valuable visual information for archival researchers. Lifebaka left the note:"(decline; might well be notable, suggest AfD; rm gallery)". I am not that experienced with Wikipedia structures and policy, so could you point me at what I could do to re-install or move the images? - or would you do it please? I don't know what "AfD; rm gallery" means. I looked, too. Thanks much. Valueyou (talk) 15:44, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Infant Oral mutilation

Thank you for your suggestions to my contribution on Infant Oral Mutilation. You have said that it may require copy editing. I'm not sure what you have in mind. How can I address this and have this issue resolved? Hildarene (talk) 07:59, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Newman image

The Barnett Newman image and other important images are nominated for deletion here: [1]...Modernist (talk) 11:16, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Orwell categorization

Please explain I don't understand this edit. Orwell wrote several about his anti-communism/anti-revolutionary socialism in several places and was in particular deeply critical of the Soviet Union and left-wing sympathizers in the UK. Is there something I'm missing here? Please respond on my talk. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:43, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Your request for userfication

 Done See User:Freshacconci/Glitch art. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:21, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I would like to further comment on the material that was posted. I am Festival Management Committee ( the company that runs the festival and all the material that I posted are correct and should not of been deleted. if you would checked or verified this information before deleteing. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.32.178.184 (talk) 06:13, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Lying on Caroline, No edit summaries

Just wondering why you lied on Caroline, No and said there is nothing on the talk page. You responded to something on the talk page. I'd better get those four tildes in! Domanator (talk) 02:32, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Look at the time stamps. freshacconci talktalk 03:17, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

I am aware, you didn't give me 5 minutes to post it. I don't think you were assuming good faith there. Nevertheless, I continued our discussion.Domanator (talk) 03:48, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

It's been on the talk page. You didn't respond. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Domanator (talk • contribs) 13:18, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Bonzinio

You recently blocked this editor - why ? His recent edit for Spondon / Robert Priseman was correct. Perhaps he does not know about the 'pendantics' of Wiki editing (he be not alone !), but, his edit in this case would appear to be (confirmed via email with RP) in good faith. Anoraker (talk) 09:39, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

I didn't block him--I'm not an administrator. That account was blocked for being a sockpuppet of R. Pidgeon. The latter account was blocked for 24 hours. Bonzinio/Pidgeon is free to edit using the R. Pidgeon account. freshacconci talktalk 10:29, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Glad to hear that - oneself having been the recipient of some malicious warnings from some nerdy editors also ! One be still to come to terms with the 'ins and outs' of wiki editing etiquette ! Anoraker (talk) 10:55, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Robert Priseman

Do you know him ? Moi ? - knows of him. He has not mentioned Spondon on his own website, just Derbyshire. But he has confirmed elsewhre Spondon. How much proof do you need ? Do you like 'the dark' ? or are you simply intent on leaving others in it ? ! 92.41.184.151 (talk) 13:48, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Do you not understand what a reliable source is? We can't simply take your word for it. Who are you? A guy on the internet. You can make any claim and we're just supposed to take your word on it? Sorry. The artist's website says Derbyshire, so unless you find some other published source, that's what it will be. freshacconci talktalk 13:51, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Album-Ornette-Coleman-Ornette.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Album-Ornette-Coleman-Ornette.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 15:07, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Done. freshacconci talktalk 15:14, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Caroline, No

I have just gone to User talk:Domanator to post a warning about edit warring, but I see that you have beaten me to it. However, you too have been involved in the same edit war. I am sure that you don't need to have the policy on edit warring pointed out to you, and you must know that it could lead to a block. I have no knowledge of the subject, and no opinion on which of you is "right", but since the two of you can't agree, perhaps you could look at WP:Dispute resolution in the hope of finding something that may help to resolve matters. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:39, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

No, I realize that my two reverts brings me close to WP:3RR. This is a pretty minor issue but I think that we should be listing less not more cover versions of any song and keep it to sourced descriptions of significant covers. I'll refrain from reverting Domanator again if he re-posts and make my argument further on the talk page. I suspect there may be a sock issue here too but given the triviality of this issue I'll go slow on any of this. Cheers. freshacconci talktalk 15:35, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, you may have made only two reverts within 24 hours, but over a longer time you have made the same revert five times. Not enough, I think, for a block, but enough that you need to be careful. (For what it's worth, my own view is that far too many popular music articles have far too much trivial content, and very often cover versions are trivia, but I don't know and frankly don't want to know the rights and wrongs in this case.) JamesBWatson (talk) 16:48, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Lisa steele birthday suit.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Lisa steele birthday suit.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 23:19, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

A Fan

i reporting you , you fucking dick head i kept all details and will forwrding your action to wikipedia your action and un lawful and you will be suspended.

Oh, where exactly did you report me, and for what? freshacconci talktalk 22:05, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

We're recruiting art lovers!

Archives of American Art Wikimedia Partnership - We need you!

Hi! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the Smithsonian Archives of American Art and I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about art to participate in furthering art coverage on Wikipedia. I am planning contests and projects that will allow you access, no matter where you live, to the world's largest collection of archives related to American art. Please sign up to participate here, and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch (talk) 00:14, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Removal of link as inappropriate link "Remodernist film"

Hello Freshacconci,

I'm just wondering what your reasoning was for reverting the last edit as an "inappropriate link"? I looked through the article that gives guideline on external links and couldn't find something that made sense for it to be removed. Since there are links to other short films in the "list of remodernist films" section, I'm further confused as to why the last one was inappropriate.

Thanks! Arturobandini (talk) 11:52, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

?? I'll wait another day for a response before reverting your edit. Arturobandini (talk) 03:22, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

DuDu Herrera Sedel Deletion Request

I was just wondering what "foreign language of uncertain notability" meant and what speedy deletion policy it pointed to --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 16:15, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Lennon/Reagan

hi - I completely agree with your reversions, removing this specious Reagan story. Not on one account from someone pushing a book indeed, now taken up by conservative websites, and still very doubtful. Would you let me know if this becomes an issue so I can weigh in - I have so many pages on watch that I might miss this and don't want to. Thanks - and nice to meet you - I've certainly seen you around for a long time! Tvoz/talk 16:36, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, this is going to be a fun few days. My edit has already been reverted. I asked that editor to at least discuss his reasons on the talk page. Basically, a disgruntled ex-employee has published some nonsense that should be easily be refuted based on Lennon's own words during the last year of his life, the Playboy interviews for starters. Now Fox et al are jumping on it like this is significant (not to mention the wording is pretty disingenuous--he was not employed by John and Yoko until Lennon's death but was apparently fired). Good to meet you too--seen your name around but I do believe this is the first time we've officially crossed paths. freshacconci talktalk 18:50, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Zimmerman

The article on John G. Zimmerman does indeed seem a bit promotional, but I know next to nothing about sports or swimsuit photography and therefore am unsure. You refer the reader to a discussion on the talk page. But half an hour later, there's still no discussion. Please do initiate this. (I have no plan to do so.) -- Hoary (talk) 03:28, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Come on, come on. The article still tells the reader The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (July 2011) But there still is no sign of any dispute to be resolved. Again, I don't say that the article is not promotional; I remain sitting on the fence. My rear end is starting to hurt, so if I can't have a proper ringside seat to view your allegations and the replies that they get (and then perhaps to join the discussion), I want to return to my regular chair elsewhere. If there's still no clear allegation in the talk page a day or so from now, I'll delete the warning template. -- Hoary (talk) 02:44, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

John Baird

Regarding my edit to the John Baird article, I did cite a reliable source, i.e. the following: http://www.xtra.ca/public/National/OPEN_SECRET_Conservative_cabinet_minister_John_Baird_outed-8194.aspx , which also refers to a CBC radio interview in with Baird was outed. The sentence I added follows an assinine mention of Baird's pescitarianism. His sexuality is far more pertinent considering the homophobic nature of the Harper regime. Please restore my edit.

Here is an additional source: http://www.montrealmirror.com/2010/072910/news2.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.163.65.229 (talk) 02:37, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

This has been discussed already on the talk page. We don't print rumours. freshacconci talktalk 10:44, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for reverting my talk page. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 03:30, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Je t'aime moi non plus

Hi! I added the link to the site of Serge Gainsbourg's lyrics, which is about as far from a personal website as can be, because it is relevant. I would like to add it again but of course I don't want to get into a big thing. Please reconsider your undo. In case it matters, the same website (though other pages) is linked to by four other related wikipedia pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.4.122.54 (talk) 04:55, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Expanding the article on expressionism

Hi,

I saw that you removed an expand template I had put on the article on Expressionism. I'd be curious to hear why. The Spanish article is a featured article, well researched and thorough, and it seems like the English language article could benefit a great deal from a selective translation. Do you object to the request for translation, or the template? Thanks, Sindinero (talk) 20:53, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

One-act plays

Hello,

You removed an external link I posted on the "one-act play" page. How come? Are you planning on removing these links also:

Small-Cast One-Act Guide Online One-Act, One Page Plays (royalty free) One Act Plays & Monologues

The above links seem very similar to the "inappropriate link" I posted.

Thank you,

50.88.39.240 (talk) 16:45, 12 July 2011 (UTC)Thomas

Would you kindly give direction on proper format for dennis coelho's page

We have worked with the galleries and other organizations that Mr. Coelho works with and have tried to complete a biography that won't be cut up. There was an issue with one of his assistants who was fired and started messing with his bio. Would you please assist in writing this bio so it will remain intact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tuscanyvilla (talk • contribs) 17:12, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Manifesto

Hello Freshacconci. I insert that link because I thought it was a real contribuition. Why did you think it was inappropriate? It was not SPAM, advertising or a promotion (website, product ...). Can you explain me? Thank you. Rossi pena (talk) 23:42, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

The body fluids page

Why did you delete my expansion edit? It fell in line with the page subject. Is this not what wikipedia is for? Should not new artists who paint with body fluids be added? I have permission from the artist and also I read the legal and it says you can post a link to the website in the notes area Mativity (talk) 16:54, 4 August 2011 (UTC)Mativity

The Body Fluids in Art page.

(btw, shouldn't that title be in caps on the page) I was wondering if you reverting my addition was because I included a quote. Would it be okay if I just said, Emerging artist Nick Kushner of New York City paints works of art with his own blood and then ref his website? Can you help me so I can add him to the list. I know of other blood artists, too. I have other ref's and Nick is an established professional artist with gallery exhibits on his resume. I appreciate any help you can give me. Mativity (talk) 04:59, 5 August 2011 (UTC)Mativity.

Francesca DiMattio

Hi. This page tripped a new page filter I watch and I don't see any substantial claim of notability. Before I investigate further, I noticed you have some experience with the author here and wanted to see if you have any input. I'm not familiar with how international shows infer notability and that's the only possible claim I'm seeing. OlYeller^Talktome 13:29, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

I need your help, please

Hi Freshacconci, sorry to bother you, but I need your help. You have added two templates on the page of the artistic-literary movement IMMAGINE&POESIA, but I am not clear what exactly I have to do. As to references, I can say they are not self published, but the most of them come from two important Italian newspapers: La Stampa and Il Corriere dell'Arte. There has been a Congress in Wales recently (International Poetry Festival) where the progresses of the movement have been shown to the audience (Act of the Congess). However if you think that some of the references are not appropriate, please feel free to remove them. But above all I don't understand what I have to do with the first template (original research): what does it mean ? What kind of references are needed ? I see you are interested in Contemporary Art and I am interested in Contemporary Art too: I hope we can collaborate in the future, if you agree. Best greetings--Alessandroga80 (talk) 04:54, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

post modernism and development

with illustrations discuss post modernism and development. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janekitsao (talk • contribs) 10:35, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Your edit warring on Far-left politics

You should take it to the article talk page rather than edit warring. This isn't a BLP where edits should be entirely removed. The source I supplied is an peer reviewed journal of the highest standand. If you have an issue with POV, editing the text rather outright removal is preferable. Thnks. --Martin Tammsalu (talk) 22:34, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Um, no. You want to add it, you justify it on the talk page rather than add it back. That would be edit warring. Find a consensus for it on the talk page. freshacconci talktalk 22:35, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Have you really thought this through? If it is POV to explain why the extreme-left is considered extreme, perhaps you also dispute the article title as POV too? I have created a thread Talk:Far-left_politics#POV_to_explain_why_the_Extreme-Left_is_considered_extreme.3F, you can explain yourself there. Thanks. --00:15, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

why deleted my link in the entry of radio art?

There are references to the radio program mentioned is a very important person involved is also recognized in the Latin American context. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sol rezza (talk • contribs) 01:23, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Review request

Hi, as a long time follower of your articles and tireless Wikipedia work, I would feel privileged if you'd consider reviewing the Source: Music of the Avant Garde article I wrote earlier this month. I just submitted it for a GA nomination. I also wrote an entry on Canadian music magazine Musicworks, but it's too thin right now for a review. All the best (from France). Tellus archivist (talk) 19:44, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

I haven't been too active lately but I'd be happy to have a look at the article and review it for GA. Thanks. freshacconci talktalk 23:24, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks.Tellus archivist (talk) 20:17, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Lennon/McCartney or Lennon–McCartney

There is a discussion here where we could use your input. Thanks. CuriousEric 00:10, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

message

I havent done anything wrong, so please stop threating me, or I will report you.

114.77.216.28 (talk) 05:11, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Your "Cardiff Giant" Article Edits/Deletions

Greetings,

Please stop vandalizing/deleting the legitimate edits made in this article - you seem to be harassing fellow Wikipedians who are trying to edit the page within Wiki guidelines. The information regarding "The Cardiff1869 Free Art Project" is indeed of true interest to anyone interested in the "Popular Culture" of the Cardiff Giant. The edit posted there about the Cardiff1869 Project is in the proper section of the article as it pertains exactly to CG references in modern popular culture, and it does not link to any web site run by the project/artist, nor does it qualify in any way as COI/spamming/advertising/self promotion. The Cardiff1869 Project is indeed "notable" - please note at least three different third party references supporting the edit from across the country including those from the art world, bloggers, and private citizens who came upon the project on their own (these public and notable references are spread out as far as Brooklyn NY, San Diego CA, Pasadena CA). Thank you for your cooperation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.164.116.152 (talk • contribs)

I'll let your current block speak for itself. freshacconci talktalk 11:10, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Design

The definition I included in my manual is comprehensive and saisfatory for this word. This was long over due and I expect this to be accepted by the world. Donskum (talk) 22:14, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Howard Zinn

Hi Freshacconci, Just about the reverts you did to my edits on the Howard Zinn FBI file section. I left a bit on the discussion section about it, but I'll just mention my thinking about it since you reverted it again. It's really that the wording of the sentence as it stands heavily implies that Zinn denied the allegations throughout his life, which does not seem to be the case, and is certainly not implied in the referenced source.

Also, the referenced source draws on an FBI file compiled from numerous sources, informants,etc (whether reliable or not). There is nothing in the wiki section to indicate that Zinn's denial was made to an FBI agent. Obviously enough (in the context of 1950s USA), the fact that Zinn was speaking to FBI agents at the time seems to me an important consideration for the reader to interpret the "facts" presented in the section.

At any rate, if there is a disagreement regarding what the sentence does or does not imply, implicitly or explicitly, my edit is a succinct and short clarification which leaves no doubt in the readers mind, so at worse it is doing no harm. If it makes it clearer, then I don't see why it should be reverted to a more ambiguous wording. I'm sure you can see where I'm coming from, but perhaps there's another reason it should be reverted. Thanks.

86.41.95.88 (talk) 12:13, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you...

... for clearing the vandalism from my Talk page. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 21:12, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Hello Freshacconci! I hope you enjoy this cookie as an amicable greeting from a fellow Wikipedian, SwisterTwister talk 21:32, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Beatles

Piero Scaruffi is not made any less professional by the fact that he doesn't rate an album (that you so obviously love) as highly as you would. He is cited under album ratings on many other album pages, so I don't see why his ratings shouldn't be present on The Beatle's albums. 58.179.149.254 (talk) 23:11, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

He shouldn't be listed on any album article. He is self-published and not a professional critic. This has been discussed before many times. freshacconci talktalk 23:42, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Thanks for cleaning my Talk page. Enjoy the cupcake! — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:06, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Reply

Hello, Freshacconci. You have new messages at Talk:Felix Nussbaum.
Message added Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 18:09, 6 November 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Streaming audio of The Beatles was licensed already

Hello.
Any method besides this is exists. Make selection is actual. More info see here, please: Permission to use materials related to The Beatles (last change in topic). We will implement any advices of professionals at the website. Including, which will sent via e-mail (if not for public). I want also: the website must become under common control (as proof, that at owners of the website beatles1.ru not exist commercial interests). Which method can I select to implement this? We try for people only. Please, be free of issues, related to responsibility, otherwise we can not accomplish this important task. I think, The Beatles must be here long time ago (more, them 50 years old): WORLD HERITAGE OF UNESCO.

Some corrections at the website beatles1.ru are here (they can be changed if is need): I wait reply. Thanks. - 89.179.190.128 (talk) 23:40, 15 November 2011 (UTC).

CSD notification

The page Diana Francis looks like it may be a valid CSD, but I prefer not to delete a page unless the creator has been notified. I understand that sometimes automated tools fail to do the notification for some reason. Not sure if that was the case, but could you make the notification?SPhilbrickT 16:00, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Done. I didn't notice that the automated tool didn't send the warning which it normally does. Cheers. freshacconci talktalk 19:12, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

No problem, it happens. I haven't figured out when it fails, but this isn't the first case.--SPhilbrickT 19:15, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

amedeo modigliani

Dear Sir or madam

I do not do any promotion or sell nothing in the page is only devoted to Modigliani and there is no product for sale or contents with copyright or data not contrastable with the original fonts (that are included or linked).

thanks Secretmodigliani (talk) 22:20, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

T.M.Ananny

File:Canadian Winter.JPG 2001 web small.jpg

Merry Christmas, Freshacconci, Ho ho ho! The gift that keeps on giving.

Here we go again... Looks like it's been there for the last two weeks, even. Cheers, Lithoderm 05:52, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh, good. Just when things were becoming dull. Thanks for the heads-up. freshacconci talktalk 06:00, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

BTW, what do you think we should do about these pictures? Ananny released them under creative commons licenses, but she's only going to use them to keep spamming articles. We can't exactly delete them on copyright grounds, but still... hmmm. Lithoderm 00:49, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

I guess I could throw her a bone and keep this image on my talkpage (oh, and thanks for that, btw). Hey, she made it onto Wikipedia! As for deleting the images, I have no idea what the policy is. I'm sure I've seen plenty of images that are floating around without articles. freshacconci talktalk 01:26, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Civility and TheScotch

Just to let you know, I have left a message on TheScotch's talk page reiterating what I said on the "Eight Miles High" discussion page. There really is no excuse for that kind of name calling. I wish I hadn't been so pleasant on the "Walk Away Renee" talk page now. :-( --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 13:37, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

I've dealt with TheScotch for years. Here he's editing as an IP (I was able to figure out that this was him) on the Burt Bacharach article in 2007 with some charming edit summaries. And here he is "agreeing" with the IP's edits (I've always assumed that he and the IP were the same person since they write in the same condescending manner and TheScotch was quick to write the response defending the IP). It's also gratifying that he was quite incorrect in his opinion on the issue. Not that it changed his mind or attitude or anything. freshacconci talktalk 14:20, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Oh dear...he does seem rather brusque and ill-tempered, doesn't he? I'll probably get a tirade of abuse for daring to admonish him on his own talk page, but hopefully not. Hopefully he'll see that there's no need for name calling. After all, we're all here for the same purpose ultimately. I have to say, I think that some of the points he makes concerning the "Walk Away Renee" article are correct, such as the erroneous use of the word obbligato, but other changes he makes just seem to be change for changes sake to me, and not edits that necessarily improve the syntax or grammar of an article. That's just my opinion though. --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 14:34, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Glitch art

Would you care to explain your twinkling? Thx, --Webmgr (talk) 15:19, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

The explanation was in the edit summary. This is some guy's cv and serves no purpose other than as spam. freshacconci talktalk 16:20, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm curious to know why you feel the mention of the GLI.TC/H conference in Chicago (and later in Amsterdam and Birmingham) isn't particularly important (glitch art > history > 22:10, 6 December 2011‎ ). The GLI.TC/H conference has featured the works of over 100 glitch artists over the last two years (with hundreds of people in attendance), has released a book of essays on the subject (published by unsorted books ISBN: 978-4-9905200-1-4) and has been a source online and offline for the sharing of glitch art and ideas and the networking of artists and enthusiasts from all over the world. I find this strange considering you don't have a problem with mentioning the event in Oslo, for which there exists very little documentation. If you were to query glitch artists and enthusiasts on any of the online groups (flickr, vimeo, facebook) I think you'd find very few of them know anything about the small event in Oslo, but the vast majority are aware of GLI.TC/H, and likely even attended or participated in one of the events. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.78.3.131 (talk)

WPA pronunciation?

(Reverted 1 edit by 81.68.255.36 (talk): Sorry, that's an WPA pronounciation; we can't go by your opinion. (TW))

I have never heard of WPA pronunciation, nor does the link you provided clear things up. I know IPA and SAMPA, but not that one. What is it? In any case, the pronunciation uses IPA symbols, therefore giving the wrong pronunciation in its current form. It now says something like 'deh steel', it should be 'duh style' more or less. The difference is obvious. Please clarify. 81.68.255.36 (talk) 22:36, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of artists who have recorded "Jingle Bells"

There's a discussion over on my talkpage about this strange closure. Anything you want to add? Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 23:20, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Celebrate

A toast - Freshacconci - Happy Holidays, Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, Happy Hanukah, lets hope it's a good one! and keep on keeping on...Modernist (talk) 13:07, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Notice: Filing Of Complaint To Wikipedia About Your Continual Slander To A Living Person.

I AM FILING A COMPLAINT AGAINST FRESHACCONCI TO THE WIKIPEDIA FOUNDATION.

YOU HAVE CONTINUALLY BROKEN WIKIPEDIA POLICY WITH YOUR NEGATIVE CAMPAIGN AGAINST RAMON AYALA, A LIVING PERSON.

I Copied & Pasted Some Of Wikipedias Policies Of Biographies Of A Living Person, In Case That You Are Not Aware Of Them.

THE FOLLOWING:

Biographies of living persons (BLPs) must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives, and the possibility of harm to living subjects must always be considered when exercising editorial judgment. This policy applies to BLPs, including any living person mentioned in a BLP even if not the subject of the article, and to material about living persons on other pages.[3] The burden of evidence for any edit on Wikipedia rests with the person who adds or restores material.

How to complain to the Wikimedia FoundationIf you are not satisfied with the response of editors and admins to a concern about biographical material about living persons, you can ask the Foundation's team of volunteers for help. Please e-mail info-en-q@wikimedia.org with a link to the article and details of the problem; for more information on how to complain, see here. See here for how to contact the Wikimedia Foundation.

If you are concerned about the accuracy or appropriateness of biographical material on Wikipedia, report problems at the biographies of living persons noticeboard.

For how to complain to the Wikimedia Foundation, see here and below.Editors must take particular care when adding information about living persons to any Wikipedia page.[1] Such material requires a high degree of sensitivity, and must adhere strictly to all applicable laws in the United States, to this policy, and to Wikipedia's three core content policies:

We must get the article right. Be very firm about the use of high quality sources. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be explicitly attributed to a reliable, published source, which is usually done with an inline citation. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion.[2] Users who persistently or egregiously violate this policy may be blocked from editing.

Suburban7 (talk) 02:37, 27 December 2011 (UTC)