Peter.loader
Welcome!
edit
|
July 2011
editWelcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Suzi Quatro has been reverted.
Your edit here to Suzi Quatro was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://www.facebook.com/pages/SUZI-QUATRO-OFFICIAL-FAN-CLUB/106218856068295/) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 20:14, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Your article has been moved to AfC space
editHi! I would like to inform you that the Articles for Creation submission which was previously located here: User:Peter.loader/In the Spotlight has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/In the Spotlight, this move was made automatically and doesn't affect your article, if you have any questions please ask on my talk page! Have a nice day. ArticlesForCreationBot (talk) 11:07, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Barnstar
edit
|
The Original Barnstar | |
| This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation. |
Midsomer murders
editI don't know exactly what you are trying to do here but there is no way there should be a large navigation box for a very minor actress at the end of every article with which she has a tenuous association at best. Note that my comment on the latest reversion seems to be inaccurate in that there is some uncited information that she appeared in an episode. Nonetheless an entry of the size you added is wholly inappropriate. Please do not add it again as it will undoubtedly be viewed as spam/vandalism, particularly as you seem to be adding it elsewhere where it is similarly inappropriate. PRL42 (talk) 12:10, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you for explaining in detail why you initially removed my addition of the Suzi Quatro navbox to Midsomer Murders. Since that removal did not specify a reason in the edit summary, I did not at first realise that your edit was made in good faith, but now I do. Peter Loader (talk) 22:09, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
- What went wrong was that I made a mistake in not checking that Midsomer Murders contained at least one mention of Suzi Quatro, as required by WP:NAVBOX. I should, instead, have added the navbox to List of Midsomer Murders episodes, which does mention Quatro. This was a mistaken good faith edit, not an attempt at "spam/vandalism". I have now finished fixing this problem, as well as other similar problems with the "Television" section of the navbox (involving Dempsey & Makepeace/List of Dempsey & Makepeace episodes and Minder (TV series)/List of Minder episodes). I have also found a good source for TV episode citations and added some missing citations to Quatro-related articles. Thank you for helping me to fix my mistakes. Peter Loader (talk) 22:09, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Suzi Quatro Suzi... and Other Four Letter Words album cover.jpg
edit
Thank you for uploading File:Suzi Quatro Suzi... and Other Four Letter Words album cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.
If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:34, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
- I only uploaded the file at "12:05, 21 August 2012". So I have not yet had time to finish adding the non-free use rationale and putting the image into the Suzi... and Other Four Letter Words article's infobox — Peter Loader (talk) 13:49, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
- I have now finished these edits — Peter Loader (talk) 14:15, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Talkback
edit
Message added 18:46, 25 December 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Quatro
edit- This discussion started here: http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=User_talk:176.253.136.238&oldid=535546008 — Peter Loader (talk) 19:54, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Unless you can see the sources, I'd strongly advise you not to issue warnings about NPOV in relation to Suzi Quatro. Yes, there are situations where use of words such as "claim" can be problematic. These are usually dealt with under the scope of WP:WEASEL. However, in situations where the source is in fact querying and/or portraying various allegations, "claim" is a valid verb. I have no particular interest in the subject but it is apparent to me that you are a fan: please don't let that get in the way of things.--176.253.136.238 (talk) 17:53, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
- Philip Norman: "She is 24, and says that her body ceased developing when she was 12; by smiling a quick, cute smile – which she demonstrates – she can still get into cinemas for half-price."--176.253.136.238 (talk) 18:06, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for fixing some WP:WEASEL words that I missed. Note that though I am a fan and know that punk rock is not one of Quatro's genres, I still fixed '...and he claimed that she was "the world's only female punk rocker."' because it is not encyclopedic. Similarly, even if "the source is querying and/or portraying various allegations", it is not encyclopedic to use synonyms for said and expressions of doubt. I must admit that I missed the latter, but have now fixed them all properly (I hope) — Peter Loader (talk) 20:34, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
- Look, I know that you mean well but I really do not care whether or not you think she was/is a punk. You, like me, are a nobody here. Shaar Murray, on the other hand, is a respected music journalist and his precise words were "Let me leave you with this as you're turning the page: Suzi Quatro is, to my knowledge, the world's only female punk rocker. Meditate on that mantra". Those words, in the wider context of the article, are a claim rather than a statement - it is "to my knowledge" and the wider context is Quatro's rather inconsistent mantra on feminism. Similarly, you perhaps need to revisit WP:WEASEL because vague usage of "said" can be problematic, especially when one party is not named.
The article was very poor and is, I think, being improved. I know what I am doing with sources, I have a lot of experience of the policy areas etc (and the ones we are debating are guidelines, not policy), and your mangling of the English language ruins the flow and arguably makes less sense: the facts of the matter regarding the increase fees/cancellations etc have never been established and are allegation and counterclaim. It is not a BLP issue and MOS says we should "be judicious", not that the words should never be used.
I regret that I am having to use an IP here but I am away from home using someone else's PC and I am not prepared to use my password on it. I would be grateful if you would revert.--176.253.136.238 (talk) 21:03, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
- Look, I know that you mean well but I really do not care whether or not you think she was/is a punk. You, like me, are a nobody here. Shaar Murray, on the other hand, is a respected music journalist and his precise words were "Let me leave you with this as you're turning the page: Suzi Quatro is, to my knowledge, the world's only female punk rocker. Meditate on that mantra". Those words, in the wider context of the article, are a claim rather than a statement - it is "to my knowledge" and the wider context is Quatro's rather inconsistent mantra on feminism. Similarly, you perhaps need to revisit WP:WEASEL because vague usage of "said" can be problematic, especially when one party is not named.
- I think that to represent Shaar Murray's point of view fairly, it would be best to expand his quote
- he said that she was "the world's only female punk rocker."
- to something like
- he said "...Suzi Quatro is, to my knowledge, the world's only female punk rocker."
- However, I do not have access to the relevant source so cannot do it myself. Please would you make this change, or something like it — Peter Loader (talk) 21:28, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
- I think that to represent Shaar Murray's point of view fairly, it would be best to expand his quote
- As far as the increase in fees is concerned, I feel that putting back the expressions of doubt "accusations" (twice) and "allegedly" (all referring to Quatro and Most) plus the synonyms for said "counterclaimed" and "claimed" (in their reply) would not be consistent with a WP:NPOV because they all reflect badly on Quatro and Most — Peter Loader (talk) 21:28, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
- No, they do not. This is your fan POV showing. You really should not even be editing the article because your position is so obvious. Hopefully, in the next week or so I'll be able to log in and then you can check my contribution history, which will hopefully indicate that I have no axe to grind in this matter.--2.219.218.79 (talk) 11:47, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
- As far as the increase in fees is concerned, I feel that putting back the expressions of doubt "accusations" (twice) and "allegedly" (all referring to Quatro and Most) plus the synonyms for said "counterclaimed" and "claimed" (in their reply) would not be consistent with a WP:NPOV because they all reflect badly on Quatro and Most — Peter Loader (talk) 21:28, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
The guideline Wikipedia:Conflict of interest states that "Any external relationship – personal, religious, political, academic, financial, and legal – can trigger a conflict of interest. How close the relationship needs to be before it becomes a concern is governed by common sense. An article about a band should not be written by the band's manager, and a biography should not be written by the subject's spouse. But subject-matter experts are welcome to contribute to articles in their areas of expertise, while being careful to make sure that their external relationships in that field do not interfere with their primary role on Wikipedia." It also states that "Beliefs and desires alone do not constitute a conflict of interest. They may lead to biased editing, but biased editing can occur in the absence of a conflict of interest."
I have declared that I am a Quatro fan on my user page and I am careful to avoid this interfering with my primary role as a Wikipedian. In particular, I am not yet convinced that the suggested change to Shaar Murray's quote and my wish to avoid reverting edits to the "increase in fees" text are inconsistent with a neutral point of view. The WP:NPOV policy states: "Prefer nonjudgmental language. A neutral point of view neither sympathizes with nor disparages its subject (or what reliable sources say about the subject), although this must sometimes be balanced against clarity. Present opinions and conflicting findings in a disinterested tone." So I intend to continue editing the Suzi Quatro article for the time being — Peter Loader (talk) 18:17, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
- This discussion continued here:http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=User_talk:176.253.136.238&oldid=536751973, in the February 2013 section — Peter Loader (talk) 19:54, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
User page edit by an unblocked user
edit You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Talkback
edit
Message added 11:27, 11 May 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
I don't think that the current revision, including source, breaches NFCC#2 NtheP (talk) 11:27, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
Suzi Quatro albums
editI disagree with you regarding the categorization of some of the redirects in Category:Suzi Quatro albums, so I posted a message at WT:ALBUMS. Thanks. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 18:56, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, you are right — I missed the bit about Category:Redirects from albums in Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Album article style guide#Redirects. Sorry, Peter Loader (talk) 21:18, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
It is not unreferenced about Suzi Quatro, look at her discography her chart hits had dried up there's no two ways about it just look at it to see! Also she is not a major rock star, if she is then not in the U.K, she had her last U.K hit in 1982 hardly what counts as a major rock star is it. In booklets of her CDs it even says her hit records had dried up and diversified to acting. I'm not being derogatory of her either, if you read it I even say about continuing to tour and being a record company's best selling artist! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skiwalkko (talk • contribs) 21:38, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Suzi Quatro Chart Placings
Hello, you reverted one of my edits and claimed it was vandalism it was not. In Suzi Quatro's A Girl From Detroit album it clearly states that shhad a UK #54 hit with I bit off more than I could chew and a #52 hit with I May be too young. Please allow my edit to remain. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yf,jgfjyghfuydtmh (talk • contribs) 17:27, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
File:Suzi Quatro In the Spotlight Deluxe Edition album cover.jpeg listed for discussion
edit
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Suzi Quatro In the Spotlight Deluxe Edition album cover.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:48, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
File:Suzi Quatro In the Spotlight Deluxe Edition album cover.jpeg listed for discussion
edit A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Suzi Quatro In the Spotlight Deluxe Edition album cover.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 23 May 2020 (UTC)