Small word of advice, you are supposed to reply on my talk page not my user-page :D indopug (talk) 21:31, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, nice to see somebody working on the article! Anyway, I'd suggest looking at The Smashing Pumpkins; that's a really good FA, and I'd recommend using it as a template. Motorhead, on the other hand, often goes into unnecessary detail. indopug (talk) 07:29, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um, dude, you are supposed to leave comments at the bottom of any talk page. To make things simpler, just click on the "new section" button at the top of this page. One more thing, you're supposed to sign by typing in four tildes (~~~~); why does your signature pipe to WesleyDodds and why is the date 8 June? Odd. Anyway its great to that the Stripes are coming out with a new record; which one of theirs is your favourite BTW? indopug (talk) 14:11, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for leaving the note for me.

I've always thought that was a great picture, because Malcolm and Martin are frequently portrayed as polar opposites.

Take care. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 23:17, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello! :) I thought you might be interested in this. Check it out and add your name under "Participants" if your interested. Have a nice day and happy editing! --Grrrlriot (talk) 00:10, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note. Pop-country doesn't exist. It just re-directs to Country pop. It's bad form to add re-direct links. You need to backtrack your edits of yesterday and make the req'd corrections to those incorrect links you added. Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 08:59, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted the flagicon you added to The White Stripes. Please read Template:Infobox_Musical_artist#Origin and WP:MOSFLAG before placing any more flagicons in infoboxes. Aspects (talk) 01:31, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Ramones. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 01:24, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading Image:Tim010987.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. (ESkog)^(Talk) 05:21, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Tim010987.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tim010987.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:27, 24 July 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 17:27, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there. I saw Personal Best as a GA nominee but it was not nominated accordingly. Please check the proper nomination: WP:GAN. Thank you. --Efe (talk) 06:54, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to tell you but Personal Best seems not GA-ready yet. My very first concern is that it lacks sources. The infobox is even not of C-class (because its incomplete) and there are lots of MoS non-compliant style and formatting. I would like to help with the latter comments but the sourcing should be done by the editor of the article. Thank you. --Efe (talk) 07:26, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, we do not understand each other. My concern is Personal Best because its currently a GAN. Anyway, whatever you want to do, its up to you. Good luck. --Efe (talk) 09:37, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Edit conflict) I checked and White Stripes is also a GA nominee. Please put this template on the top of the talk page: {{subst:GAN|subtopic=name of the subsection on this page where the article is listed}}. Thank you. --Efe (talk) 09:45, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Nice to meet you. I just wanted to give you the heads up that I reverted the recent edit you made on Che Guevara with reference to his stylized portrait. I understand the inherent premise of your revision, but would contend that many of his pictures have been turned into stylized symbols (sometimes he has a cigar etc). If you feel strongly that I am incorrect, then by all means revert my revert and I will let your addition stand. With that said, you appear to be a very capable editor and I would encourage you to stick around the article and make suggestions or contributions if you have time.   Redthoreau (talk) RT 04:22, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome, and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test on the page Bad Brains (album) worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox. Thank you.
Do not ignore formatting rules for albums as set down in WP:ALBUM. If you ignore consensus formatting you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Libs (talk) 23:41, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be broken? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.43.143.58 (talk) 04:32, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working on the GA nom here. Ling.Nut ^{(talk—WP:3IAR)} 11:49, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Barnstar of High Culture
		For your work on The White Stripes article(now GA)! Bravo! [[::User:Frédérick Lacasse|Frédérick Lacasse]] ([[::User talk:Frédérick Lacasse|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Frédérick Lacasse|contribs]]) 17:46, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Tim, first and most importantly thank you for your effort to deter vandalism at Barack Obama and elsewhere. The article previously had a similar warning (if I recall correctly) and it was eventually removed due to WP:DENY and, to a lesser extent, WP:BEANS. Although I've removed the commented warning that you added at the top of Barack Obama, I nonetheless wanted to let you know that I do consider the addition to have been very clearly added in good faith, and also to invite you to open a discussion at Talk:Barack Obama if you still feel the warning should be added. Thanks, --Clubjuggle ^T/C 13:36, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from We're Going to Be Friends. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. please don't just randomly remove a genre without explaining your edit - -The Spooky One (talk to me) 00:40, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hmmm. most band articles i check on still have the genres on them.... I don't see why people would remove genres... the genre space is still in the infobox album and infobox artists, i don't think they should be removed from an article until it is removed from a template. - -The Spooky One (talk to me) 00:46, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT: Actually, it seems to have been removed from the infoboxes? do you know why? - -The Spooky One (talk to me) 00:49, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

oh, i see. that kind of sucks. On some articles, that feild is very useful... but in most articles the genre issue is covered elswhere... - -The Spooky One (talk to me) 00:52, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for Image:Crustpunks.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Crustpunks.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 00:50, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop removing genres. If we end up going back to showing them, we'd be kinda screwed if they're not there. Titan50 (talk) 19:03, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted your edit to the Dixiecrat article, as in 1948 Wallace was not a Dixiecrat; he didn't walk out of the 1948 convention and did not support the breakaway elements. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:03, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

You may be interested to know that WikiProject Punk music has recently undergone a major revitalization. Please visit the project page to see our new look and check out some of our helpful new features, such as the Assessment Department and the Collaboration of the week. There are also a number of tasks on our Things to do page that you may be interested in helping with.

We are currently holding a roll call to help gauge how many active project members we have. Please visit the project's talk page and add your signature to the roll sheet to express your continued interest in the project. Also, if you have not already done so, please take a minute to add your name to the Participants page along with a brief summary of your punk-related interests, so that other project members will be better able to collaborate with you. If you do not add your signature to the roll sheet by November 30, 2008 your name will be moved to our list of inactive members. We may also take the liberty of removing the project userbox from your userpage if it appears there, to prevent you from automatically appearing in Category:WikiProject Punk music members. Of course you are free to rejoin the project and re-add the userbox at any time if you would like to become active in the project again.

Thank you and we hope you will continue to support WikiProject Punk music!

--IllaZilla (talk) 01:08, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tim, I've reverted your edit on White Stripes where you capitalised the genres in the infobox. As genres are not proper nouns they shouldn't be capitalised (apart from at the beginning of a list or a sentence). Please see WP:MUSTARD#Capitalization. Thanks, --JD554 (talk) 10:15, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you point me to the why? Since you'll likely end up at Barack Obama and get accused by both sides (the pro- and anti-'Hussein') people, it'd be good to say 'why' before they start screaming?  :-) Shenme (talk) 00:58, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, why have you removed the middle names from all over our presidents? Happyme22 (talk) 00:59, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well why change all the others when we can just add "Hussein" in Obama's box? Happyme22 (talk) 01:06, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As was pointed out to me, the manual of style indicates the full name should be used in the header of the infobox. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:09, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care that much one way or the other. I'll see what the other users have to say about it before I revert your changes. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:17, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tim010987, I don't think it's wise to start changing lots of articles on this issue, in part per WP:POINT. The Obama "Hussein" issue will probably go back and forth a dozen more times before it gets settled, if it even does get settled. And what's decided there may just be for presidential articles, not everyone else. Also note that your edits like this one are mistaken on another ground: the "Mike" usage in the first sentence is correct and necessary regardless of what the top name in the infobox ends up as. Wasted Time R (talk) 13:18, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most of your recent edits appear to have been marked as minor edits even when you are changing the content of articles. Please see WP:MINOR which explains that it should only be for simple edits and gives relevant examples. Thanks, --JD554 (talk) 08:18, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed your edit to Sublime (band) that took our some description of their music style. I didn't revert it, because I wanted to check if it's some sort of WP policy. If not, I tend to think that many bands are a mixture and not just one genre. MakeBelieveMonster (talk) 01:29, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, genres should be separated by commas instead of <br /> tags in infoboxes - see WP:ALBUM#Genre. <br /> tags cause unnecessary extra vertical height. Thanks! Spellcast (talk) 06:45, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please find a cite as to Odetta's health? Bearian (talk) 23:55, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you should check out the message I just left on IllaZilla's talk page. I'm the one who gave him the idea for being general with the first genre listed in an article. However, as I pointed out right now on his talk page, how general you are varies from article to article. Simply put, you don't have to always write "_______ is a rock band" (it does come in handy with disputed subgenres, though). WesleyDodds (talk) 11:20, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So do I, which is why I often find a way to discuss subgenres later in the lead section. There's two major points to consider. Generality is relative and varies from article to article. If someone is a famous physicist or paleontologist, start out saying that, not "scientist". More relevant to the topic at hand, when you're writing about a song or an album by a band, you often won't go in-depth regarding genres. That's why "Paranoid Android' is specific with Radiohead's genre in the lead; the subject of the article is different, so the way you approach genre in the article will be different. The other thing is there's a skill to writing effective prose, which is why I tell people about my suggestions about generality in the lead. It's a technique I use by interpreting the guidelines, and it's worked very well for me. However, it's not a guideline (just an interpretation and implementation of a guideline), and even then guidelines aren't hard and fast rules on Wikipedia (see Wikipedia:Ignore all rules for information on this). By all means be as general as posisble in the first sentence, but ask yourself with each article every time: what am I discussing in this article? Am I discussing this band' impact on a particular style of music? Am I writing about a band that's dabbled in multiple styles? How can I best convey this for the reader? Speaking from experience, it will be different every time, because no article on Wikipedia is ever the same. Why is why they're guidelines, not outright core polices. If you ever need help with a particular article's lead section, feel free to ask. WesleyDodds (talk) 11:45, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Minor thing: Don't link either "American" or "band"; that's overlinking. That hidden note is unnecessary too. indopug (talk) 11:55, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, After his last reversion I removed it from my Watchlist (it was only on there because I reverted some vandalism awhile ago) as I could not be bothered anymore :-( From what I can see from references it is referred to as both Punk and Rock 'N' Roll. It was on a Mojo magazine best Punk album listing which may help; also I note that the article about the band refers to them as Punk. I have just tried discussing it with him. Lame Name (talk) 20:16, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thats cool if u want to add punk as well, it was influential on punk, i agreed with that,

but musically, whether your familiar with rock n roll or not,

the structure of there songs was within the rock n roll , r'n'b, chord progression, most of the time,

where as other punk bands removed it and stripped it down further, basing it almost entirely on fifth chords (e.g. Pistols)

where as rock n roll goes back and forth between fifths to seven chords within the blues type scale.

i don't consider 'punk' an attitude thing, but a style of music.

im not sayin it didn't have elements that punk would have, but that it was literally rock n roll, r'n'b, throughout the album.

And if u read the linear notes in L.A.M.F., they mention the early Rolling Stones influence, and the r'n'b of the Yardbirds...

As long as they're acknowleged as a rock n roll band, im cool with that... peace. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peppermankk (talk • contribs) 03:30, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Vicesquad promopic.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 08:11, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. There was a change in the lead-in sentence to this article in December, from the description of this band as a "punk rock band" to a "rock band". As you were the editor who first made this change and then self reverted, can you please comment at a Request for Comment on this issue just so your position is clear? Thank you. --Oakshade (talk) 09:12, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for weighing in! --Oakshade (talk) 18:42, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tim, just thought I'd tell you about WP:NPOV; basically, you shouldn't change genres on music articles to suit your own point-of-view. You can change a genre if it's backed up by consensus and/or reliable sources. Right now, I'm seeing lots of genre changes by you but no consensus and definitely no reliable sources backing up your assertions. If you require any help or have any questions, please feel free to message me. Regards and take care, Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 14:21, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Er... Yes, Tim. Please discuss it in future, okay? People can get rather annoyed when genres are changed even without discussion! Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 04:37, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is your final warning for constant genre changing to fit your POV. You are advised to stay completely away from changing genres now as you are currently edit warring with numerous users. Also, this is your final warning for personal attacks against fellow editors (see what you did here); please read WP:NPA. Remember: No more genre changes. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 11:27, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]