User talk:Steelbeard1

For older entries, see User talk:Steelbeard1/archive3

You need to forward slash or you create a new user name. PS: Did you know you already have some archive pages?

User talk:Steelbeard1/archive1

User talk:Steelbeard1/archive2

Studios

I saw that. But, starting a new section is not responding to an existing one. It is starting a topic. This is responding to an existing topic, in that topic with semicolons. How can I deduce that you were responding to my proposal if you start a whole other topic? I can't. Are you saying you want to move the article to "The Lot"? Please modify for clarity. — Archive! Archive! ^Archive! _Archive! Archive!...the monkeys from the Wizard of Oz said as the flew away. ~ WikiDon (talk) 21:13, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

RCA

I saw the message you sent me. So you're saying that RCA corp doesn't exist, but thomson owns it and thomson is making their products with the rca brand??? I don't gfet it/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Guy1423 (talk • contribs) 23:00, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I get it! RCA Corporation was discontinued, but the trademark still exists and is used by some companies? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Guy1423 (talk • contribs) 23:11, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

This could make things clearer to some editors/readers ;) Gwen Gale (talk) 00:11, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Masterworksbroadway.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Masterworksbroadway.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:13, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Popeye DVD 2

I'm wondering which version of the DVD I got. I don't think it was the a.a.p. version. Maybe that only went out to some shipments, not all? I would say there are some other quality issues, but we're dealing with 70-year-old cartoons here. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 07:36, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Some of the specials were good. It was interesting to hear Jack Mercer's real voice, which is surprisingly high-pitched. He also sounded like he was reading from a script, but whatever. They had a nice special about Mae Questel. Too bad they didn't have an interview comparable to the Mercer interview. The Fleischer documentary was excellent, and poignant. What they might have accomplished, had they not let personal issues get in the way, who knows? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 07:39, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. It's still not clear to me what the issue is, but I don't think it's worth going through the trouble. Maybe the original mistaken disc will become a collectible of sorts. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 12:55, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

CQ Politics Michigan link

Thanks for letting me know. I will get on that. America69 (talk) 18:49, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Elektra Records

I changed the logo to the last one because the releases of new material up until the absorbtion by Atlantic Records used that logo. Even the Elektra releases under the Atlantic aegis use this logo, so I think it should be the one that one sees when they access the page. The sooner that Time Warner buys WEA back from that Canadian maniac, the better. Peace. —MuzikJunky (talk) 07:00, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Then should there be an infobox at all with the dormant label? Steelbeard1 (talk) 11:20, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

The Beatles Newsletter

Beatles editor, Dendodge, wants to start sending out The Beatles Newsletter again. If you would like to receive it, please leave a message on this page. All the best, --andreasegde (talk) 17:27, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Popeye as a Scot?

Maybe his Scottish brogue gave it away. Or his Scottish surname. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 14:12, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

And Popeye is into spinach. I don't know that that's a traditional Scottish dish. Haggis would be. Popeye has dealt with the Sea Hag, but not with Haggis. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:11, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

List of active drive-in theaters

Sorry it took so long to respond. My reply can be found on the article's talk page. --Reverend Loki (talk) 20:12, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Happy Beatles Day!

Happy Beatles Day! Just a message from the Beatles WikiProject! Have a great day, Steelbeard1!

...... Densock .. Talk^{(Dendodge on a public network)} 10:09, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Beatles newsletter July 2008

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter Issue 013 – July 2008
Beatles News A nine-minute interview with Paul McCartney and John Lennon has surfaced that had been lost since 30 April 1964, after they returned from their first American tour. Paul Weller played an unexpected cover of The Beatles' "All You Need Is Love" during a gig being staged as part of London's iTunes Festival. "Beatles Day – Imagine The Concert" will be a part of this year’s Summer Pops Festival. Prime Minister Gordon Brown has revealed his favourite Beatles song - "All My Loving" - because he played it on the piano as a young upstart. McCartney and Starr will be among the stars to honour Sir George Martin at USC Representatives for The Beatles, Activision Inc. (NASDAQ: ATVI), and MTV Games are in talks about developing a Beatles-themed video game versions of Guitar Hero (series) and Rock Band (video game). McCartney talked about his last moments with Harrison, just days before his death. Rare photos of The Beatles are to go on display in Little Chalfont next week. Yoko Ono plans to appeal a failed lawsuit against a filmmaker who used a piece of footage from the Imagine (film) without permission. US District Judge Sidney Stein found in favour of the filmmakers based on Fair use. (Interesting for Wikipedia editors...) Ringo Starr's new album, Liverpool 8, only sold 7,000 copies in its first week of release. Project News As you may have seen, the talk page banner changed a bit. It has a couple of bugs (most notably the categorisation problems), but the {{WPBannerMeta}} standardisation was long overdue. Thank you to Dendodge for sorting it. The newsletter's back after a very positive reaction, and thanks are again due to Dendodge. Article adoptions: Heather Mills will be a hot topic next month, as the truth will be referenced. The hottest Project page this month has been The Quarrymen (now a GA). It reveals the most accurate history of their early days, because so many other web pages tell a completely untrue story (one web page said they lost a Carroll Levis competition to a woman who played the spoons :) Other Project news The project now has 5 FA articles, and 33 GA articles. George Harrison, Ringo Starr, and Klaus Voormann are still B-class articles, as is Yoko Ono (will she ever get a GA rating?) Member News New members to the project (since the last issue, which was a long time ago) include a lot of names, which can be found here.... Project member news:	Issue of the Month Apart from the usual vandals, there is an ongoing problem with Wikipedia editors deleting free and fair-use photos because they don't think they are of any value to articles, even though this sometimes leaves articles with no photos at all. These editors do not leave notes on talk pages, so if you see that a photo has vanished, check the talk page and the history log. From the Editors It's been a while, but the newsletter's back! After a short discussion on the project talk page, seemingly unanimous consensus to bring it back was reached. This issue, and subsequent ones, will probably be shorter - as we kept running out of things to say before! There's a lot to say this month, purely due to the long absence of a newsletter, but we'll keep it as brief as possible. In order to get delivery by Denbot sorted, the special delivery interface has been changed slightly - but existing delivery options still stand. Inactive participants who want delivery should place their names on this list. If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy! Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 014 – August 2008). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing! Contributors to this Issue Dendodge (Lead Editor & Distributor) andreasegde (Gossip and lie-detector editor)
Complete To Do List Make visible or invisible by clicking Show or Hide, respectively.

Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

{{../Issue-nav|013}}...... Densock .. Talk^{(Dendodge on a public network)} 10:04, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

RE: User:Rebafan11

Thanks, I caught him last night, and even though I thought it obvious he was another sock, I didn't have any evidence of disruptive editing at the time. I'll check his work again. dhett ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:20, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Abbey Road (album)

The songwriting credit is to "Starkey", not "Richard Starkey", at least on my vinyl & CD; that's why I always render credits verbatim and wlink if necessary, so as not to lie about the credit. --Rodhullandemu 18:30, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Likewise, on my copes, credit is to "Harrison" rather than "George Harrison". I think the credits should at least be consistent and correct rather than consistent and wrong. --Rodhullandemu 18:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Across The Universe (film)

Thanks for the comment on my talk page about Across The Universe (film) on the Beatles template. Please note that I did not add this film to the template in the first place, I only modified the formatting. If you are of the opinion that that Across The Universe (film) should not be on the template, feel free to remove it. Personally, I feel that there are a number of off-topic references on this template. --Countdown to oblivion (talk) 13:16, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

I see that you already removed it from the template. --Countdown to oblivion (talk) 13:19, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Stub

It may not be a stub okay, its start but not a B. A B is Def Leppard discography, Stone Temple Pilots discography, Pink Floyd discography or Eminem discography but not this one. But it doesn't have sources, ut has track listing at the page, it has a short lead to short, if you want to i can get the leader of the wikiproject discography to take a look at it. He'll probably call it a stub or a start just as me. I'm not goin to revert your edit if you want to denie it.

I can show you the guidline for whats a stub, if you want. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 13:32, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

personal attacks

Regarding your comments on Talk:ABN AMRO: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.--Tikiwont (talk) 10:55, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Example please? Steelbeard1 (talk) 10:58, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Such as [1]. --Tikiwont (talk) 11:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Changed anal retentive to obsessive "strictly by the book" . Steelbeard1 (talk) 11:22, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

ABN AMRO

Can you add you input into another stupid edit war involving the Dutch financial institution ABN AMRO: I'm afraid this is a topic I know absolutely nothing about, and if I edit or contribute to talk I could end up making things worse. But good luck. Ward3001 (talk) 17:25, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

If that company calls itself by all capital letters, and legal documents also call it that way, then that's what it is, and it is not wikipedia's place to try to change that by applying so-called "grammar rules" to it. This is the same debate as The CW, and it's worth pointing out that the guy who kept insisting it couldn't call itself that, got himself indefinitely blocked for disruption. [I also posted this comment on the article's talk page.] Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 17:46, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

It's on my watch list. That guy is hung up on rules, like the late, unlamented Rollosmokes was. The first rule is, get it right. Don't make wikipedia look stupid(er). Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 18:33, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

The "the" THING

Oh bugger, it's here again, and just after I had stopped waking up and screaming "definitive article!" to the consternation of my neighbours. :))) --andreasegde (talk) 01:43, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

RE: ABN Amro

Please check out Wikipedia_talk:Requested_moves#Removal_of_statements_contesting_proposed_move before proceeding with any further discussion on the WP:RM proposal page. Thanks. JPG-GR (talk) 00:11, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• And on a related note calling people anal retentive, while arguably an appropriate description of a class of behaviour, does not really help to avoid drama. Is it likely to encourage them to gracefully back down, or is it drawing battle lines? I'd say the latter. You have the facts on your side, and I believe also the best arguments, it's unnecessary to resort to rhetorical exuberance. Guy (Help!) 21:20, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Allow me to emphasise Guy's comment - that was uncivil behavior on your part, unnecessary, and not acceptable behavior. Please don't do it again. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 20:24, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Request to move article Ron Richards incomplete

You recently filed a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves to move the page Ron Richards to a different title - however your proposal is either incomplete or has been contested as being controversial. As a result, it has been moved to the incomplete and contested proposals section. Requests that remain incomplete after five days will be removed.

Please make sure you have completed all three of the following:

1. Added {{move|NewName}} at the top of the talk page of the page you want moved, replacing "NewName" with the new name for the article. This creates the required template for you there.
2. Added {{subst:RMtalk|NewName|reason for move}} to the bottom of the talk page of the page you want to be moved, to automatically create a discussion section there.
3. Added {{subst:RMlink|PageName|NewName|reason for move}} to the top of today's section here.

If you need any further guidance, please leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Requested moves or contact me on my talk page. - JPG-GR (talk) 05:23, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Apology from Fangusu

Steelbeard1, I'm very sorry about confusing the rabbit character in Porky's Hare Hunt with the official Bugs in A Wild Hare. He may not be the gray rabbit that we recognize, but he is supposed to be Bugs in prototype form, right? Fangusu (talk) 10:46, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

You just need to read the history more, before making changes. We had this discussion some months back. "Happy Rabbit" was a figment of Mel Blanc's later imagination. The early rabbit characters are usually referred to as Bugs Bunny "prototypes", and Wild Hare is regarded by cartoon historians as the true debut of Bugsy. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 10:53, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Producers

The Beatles Box Set I responded at the talk there. Apparently, I was ill-informed, but I retained one of the production credits. Please post on my talk if you need me again. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:08, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for Image:TheBeatlesBoxSet.JPG

Thank you for uploading Image:TheBeatlesBoxSet.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image 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 image 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 images used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the image 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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:38, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Ohio's 11th congressional district special election, 2008

You are invited to contibute to the deletion discussion on this page.--Dr who1975 (talk) 17:53, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Americanstandardlogo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Americanstandardlogo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:12, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Nader Polling in Michigan

For whatever reason, I'm unable to open Time's website, but this link clearly shows the results of the poll showing Nader at 6%

http://blogs.courant.com/capitol_watch/2008/09/ralph-nader-at-6-in-michigan-4.html

--Criticalthinker (talk) 22:41, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I was not the one that originally added the poll. Does the poll at the Time magazine link not show Nader with 6% in Michigan? --Criticalthinker (talk) 22:55, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Johnfogertymillenium.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Johnfogertymillenium.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) 02:28, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Polling figures

The "Notes" at the end of the "Latest Results" section in the article clearly state: "'Likely' states are states that have polled ahead for a candidate in each circumstance for the previous 5 months (including polls in archive)." I agree that Michigan can be considered "Likely Obama" if you use different criteria. However, according to the rules agreed upon for the article Statewide opinion polling for the United States presidential election, 2008, Michigan cannot be considered "likely Obama". Otherwise, Iowa should have been labeled "Likely Obama" for a long time. 85.178.69.10 (talk) 14:31, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem

Thanks for your uploads. You've indicated that the following images are being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why they meet Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page an 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.

• Image:Pastmasters1label.jpg
• Image:Pastmasters2label.jpg
• Image:Pastmastersvol1and2albumcover.jpg

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --08:32, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Polydorearly78.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Polydorearly78.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) 23:17, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:RCAVictorLogo.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:RCAVictorLogo.gif. 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) 04:35, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Image:Ranwood logo.gif)

You've uploaded Image:Image:Ranwood logo.gif, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Rhinologo whiteonwhite.gif)

You've uploaded Image:Rhinologo whiteonwhite.gif, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 20:47, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Emiclassicslogo.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Emiclassicslogo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 07:03, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Angelrecordslogo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Angelrecordslogo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:09, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Mercuryrecords.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Mercuryrecords.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:18, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Legacyrecordings.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Legacyrecordings.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:21, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Parlophone.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Parlophone.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:29, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Vanguardclassics.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Vanguardclassics.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:32, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Decca logo.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Decca logo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:33, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Sonyclassicallogo.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Sonyclassicallogo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:33, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

An American Carol

Thanks for this addition. I know it may seem kind of ridiculous, but if we're going to make claims like this, no matter how obvious, they need sourced, as it may not be obvious to everyone (in that case, they need to get out more). Grsz^X 16:57, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Religulous

It's cited, but it's still irrelevant, and, thus, doesn't belong. 98.168.194.130 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 00:41, 12 October 2008 (UTC).

As I said on the article talk page, where are the citations COMPARING the viewership figures of the two films? And what on earth does "But they use the same citations and that matters" mean? It doesn't make any sense to me. Nil Einne (talk) 13:13, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Garpax Records

A tag has been placed on Garpax Records requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. cf38^talk 15:47, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

WJRT

here's the proof that WJRT's digital signal will be 12 after February 17, from the FCC database.

WJRT-TV MI FLINT USA (Digital)

 Licensee: FLINT LICENSE SUBSIDIARY CORP.
 Service Designation: DT   Digital television station

 Channel: 12     204 - 210 MHz   Construction Permit

The link is already on the page as well on the template "Wuery the FCC database for WJRT".

Stop removing the information from the page or I will report you for vandalism.

The information is from FCC database for WJRT.

Please read the entire page before making unneccessary edits.

TomCat4680 (talk) 04:11, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

You're the sloppy editor. You took off half of a sentence and turned it into a fragment and made a claim that was obviously untrue about what it will do after the conversion, then kept reverting my edits. I was just pointing out your errors. I'm not apologizing because I already corrected it twice and you keep uncorrecting it. Just accept the fact that you were wrong. Also I already told you, the link you just put in is already there, someone made a template (or shortcut) under the external liks section of the article for the exact same link, so putting it there again was unneccessary. Like I said, read the entire message (or page), instead of just what you want to read.TomCat4680 (talk) 04:30, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

He made several sloppy edits if you look at the WJRT history. Steelbeard1 (talk) 04:49, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes I saw your citiation. Its already on the page in the form of a template under the External links section of the article. You must be slow so I'll it explain it for you. Hold shift and press bracket twice then TVQ then a straight line then the callsign then close the brackets

look

• Template:TVQ

it can do the same thing with any other station. for example:

• Template:TVQ
• Template:TVQ
• Template:TVQ

So the link you added is already there. Please don't put it back up. Its unneccessary and redundant.

I think you both are edit warring on this article. Please review the three revert rule and remember it is a bright line, not an entitlement. I am warning both parties. ++Lar: t/c 12:38, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

2010 Governor election

Don't add random candidates to the races, we don't know, and it's considered WP:CRYSTAL unless a source comes up. BrianY (talk) 01:58, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

So, here's a pargraph I deleted:

Potential Republican candidates include 2006 nominee and businessman Dick DeVos, state Attorney General Mike Cox, Congressman Pete Hoekstra, state Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land, Congresswoman Candice Miller, state Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop

All those people have said to news sources they aren't running/are/or something related? Or am I confused? BrianY (talk) 02:38, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

If I understand, since DeVos said he won't seek the office, there is a possibility that Cox/Lynn Land/Miller/Bishop might run but haven't said anything? If they haven't said anything, it would be speculation. BrianY (talk) 02:44, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

As a side note, I have found a reference for Dennis Archer. BrianY (talk) 02:49, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject The Beatles newsletter issue 16 - November 2008

{{../Issue-nav|016}}

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter Issue 016 – November 2008
Beatles News Bob Dylan and The Beatles: Even geniuses can have an off day - Paul McCartney unearths Carnival of Light, a lost Beatles recording. Malcolm Gladwell on Joy, Gates and the Beatles -- and on stage - Malcolm Gladwell praises The Beatles and discusses how they honed their talents in Hamburg. Beatles' 'Eleanor Rigbys identity revealed? - Paul McCartney reveals the inspiration for his song, Eleanor Rigby. Project News We now have a barnstar - it can be placed on anybody's talk page using {{subst:Beatles barnstar|Message. ~~~~}} A peer review for George Harrison has been opened by Dendodge in an attempt to get both it and Ringo Starr to good article status, in order to get The Beatles personnel to good topic status. A portal peer review has been opened for The Beatles portal in order to get it to featured portal status. It will gain the distinction of being the first portal dedicated to an individual musician/band to reach featured status. 0 new articles have been listed in the Project Log since 1 October. The project log seems to have been neglected recently, and we request that project members help us to bring it up-to-date. Member News New members to the project since the last issue include QuidProQuo23 and Feeling free. Tj999 has changed his name to TFunk.	Issue of the Month History of The Beatles has been recreated following the advice given in a peer review of The Beatles. We request your assistance in summarising the History section of The Beatles so they are not just carbon copies of each other. From the Editor Please take the time to review some articles (or submit your own) at our internal peer review page. It will help us to improve our articles. If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy! Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 017 – December 2008). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing! Contributors to this Issue Dendodge (Editor, Distributor)
Complete To Do List Make visible or invisible by clicking Show or Hide, respectively.

Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

{{../Issue-nav|016}} Denbot (talk) 17:43, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Popeye

Part of his argument is that it's just a list of the cartoons. But is there a separate list of the cartoons anywhere in wikipedia? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:54, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:WikiProject Bank of America

Wikipedia:WikiProject Bank of America, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Bank of America and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:WikiProject Bank of America during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 19:17, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Bugs Bunny edits

I just found your note on my talk page about reverting my edit on Bugs Bunny. Are you on drugs or something? I've never made any edit such as you describe, and the most recent one that I have done there has not been reverted. --Ted Watson (talk) 22:53, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Misread edit change so an apology was sent. Steelbeard1 (talk) 02:32, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

RCA Victor SelectaVision CED video discs

I just stumbled across your RCA Victor page, and I have to say, it's pretty complete. But, you left out (and I added) a section on the RCA Victor SelectaVision CED video discs from 1981-1985. What is funny is that my old boss at RCA-Camden, Charlie Horton (who also invented the VCR), was sent out to the Rockville Road plant in Indianapolis to run it.

Ahh, those were the days... Discpad (talk) 05:35, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Parlophonelogo.jpg)

You've uploaded File:Parlophonelogo.jpg, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 01:25, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

RCA Records Logo

I put a new image in the Article RCA Records, but you undo the change, i think the new image is better by the before version, that new version is a SVG Vector Image, and with transparency, thanks. zzebah_punk™ Contact with me!!! 20:52, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

But the logo is too big in relation to the RCA Victor logo. They should be equal in size. Steelbeard1 (talk) 21:25, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

But is a Vector Image, if you don't like the size I put, resize the image of a size you like, but the other image is ugly, don't have transparency and is very small. zzebah_punk™ Contact with me!!! 21:28, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

But it should be small as logos are not supposed to be prominent in infoboxes. Steelbeard1 (talk) 21:29, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I put the image with the size of 50px, look now please (RCA Records) zzebah_punk™ Contact with me!!! 21:32, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Rcarecords.gif)

Thanks for uploading File:Rcarecords.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:13, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

religulous

i haven't edited wikipedia all that much (its mostly my brothers who edit it but i havent asked them yet), but from what i've read, talk pages are for discussing the article and not the general subject, and the latter is usually removed. wolfenstein was just making a snide comment about religion in general.--71.233.128.202 (talk) 21:05, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

TomCat4680 (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

TomCat4680 (talk) 14:39, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

RCA Class-action lawsuit

You removed the class action lawsuit section I added. You said in the edit summary that it had something to do with GE. Could you tell me more about this because it seems like just about every RCA TV from my high-end 1987 RCA Dimensia to my early 2000s pos RCA Entertainment Series have that problem with the RF input. I always thought RCA products were of fairly poor quality, actually. Daniel Christensen (talk) 12:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

PS: I know about the lawsuit because my grandma was part of it when her then new 1993 RCA Colortrak TV had the problem. She got it fixed and actually got paid or something as part of the lawsuit. Daniel Christensen (talk) 12:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Replied in his talk page. Steelbeard1 (talk) 13:46, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

CBS Records

When you want to fix an interwiki you need to fix it on all sites, so in this case you need to link the japanese article to the correct article on the english site or bots like mine will keep adding the interwiki like it looks like has been happening. I will go and manually fix the japanese article so it doesn't keep happening this time. But in the future just reverting on English won't solve the issue. -Djsasso (talk) 15:33, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Beatles in 1960

Your totally right. I was meaning to write the members of The Beatles, but I must have forgot to erase the founded by part, honest mistake. Chasesboys (talk) 21:13, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Beatles Stereo/Mono

Just because a stereo mix has vocals on one side and instruments on the other does not make it "unmixed". The stereo mixes on the albums had more reverb and compression than the twin-track session tapes, implying that they were mixed.

The statement that "The first two albums, Please Please Me and With the Beatles, were mixed in mono only" clearly contradicts the information later on in the page that gives mono and stereo catalog numbers for the first two albums. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.45.114.67 (talk) 02:39, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

John Barry

Hello, why did you undo my edit to Columbia Graphophone Company? Rothorpe (talk) 22:37, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Replied in Rothorpe's talk page. Steelbeard1 (talk) 11:24, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

I've fixed the disambiguation; sorry I didn't see your point there. The list of EPs in 'External links' shows a couple of Barry's EPs on Columbia. I've also mentioned two of his hits with the JB7 in the Barry article. I hardly thought it worthwhile to mention the label, especially since the Adam Faith records were on Parlophone, but I did point out there was no EMI label at the time. Rothorpe (talk) 13:23, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Deccabroadwaylogo.gif)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:Deccabroadwaylogo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 20:47, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Steelbeard1. You have new messages at TomCat4680's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

TomCat4680 (talk) has given you a kitten! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Kittens must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Orphaned non-free media (File:Kmartlogo.png)

Thanks for uploading File:Kmartlogo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:27, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

The Beatles in Hamburg

Nice one, Steelbeard1!--andreasegde (talk) 20:17, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. The article needed a formal intro. Steelbeard1 (talk) 20:29, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Whirlpool Logo

No problem, man. I went to the wrong site, or misinterpreted something. It wasn't that hard adding it, though. ;) Connormah (talk) 03:35, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Windows Media Center edits

Hi, thanks for your contributions to Windows Media Center. Although you've added sources to attribute your information, you've improperly formatted those sources for use on Wikipedia. I have formatted them, but for future reference, you may be interested in reading how to format citations from the Manual of Style. Thanks again. Brian Reading (talk) 18:21, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Trane/Coltrane

The reason I moved the page is that "Trane" is more than a nickname. It is completely unanimous with Coltrane, such as "Bird" is with Charlie Parker and "Satchmo" is with Louis Armstrong. Jazz scholars, listeners and fans will most likely search for "Trane" to find material about Coltrane. His legacy and impact on American culture is no less notable than the financial impact of "Trane" the company. Considering all this, categorizing it as Trane (company) and creating a dab page puts both in equal perspective, without giving the company the unduly importance, which also goes against WP:NPOV. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 08:45, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Most people looking up Trane are looking up the heating and air conditioning company, not John Coltrane. Most people looking up John Coltrane's article would simply use his real name, not his one-word nickname. Steelbeard1 (talk) 20:53, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

This is where you are wrong... it is what I've been trying to explain: even if a smaller percentage of readers will look up "Trane" to find John Coltrane than the HVAC company, it still justifies the dab page. Any particular reason you are so strongly against it? Hearfourmewesique (talk) 12:26, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Trane Inc. is a leading multinational HVAC company with nearly 100 years of experience. There is no other Trane, Coltrane notwithstanding, in a Wikipedia article. This is different from Satchmo, the nickname for Louis Armstrong which is also the name of a little known computer application. The dab page for Satchmo is therefore appropriate. If there are more than two articles which use the name Trane, then I can see a separate dab page. Steelbeard1 (talk) 13:36, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

There is no other Trane, Coltrane notwithstanding, in a Wikipedia article. I see that sadly, my explanations have landed on deaf ears; Coltrane's legacy and cultural impact is no less than Trane Inc.'s 100 years of experience. I am reminding you again about WP:NPOV since this is clear promotion of the monetary organization over a musical legend. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 14:20, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Looking over John Coltrane's extensive discography, there are a handful of albums which use the name Trane, but sadly there is no John Coltrane album which is titled "Trane" listed. So my statement, unfortunately, still stands. Steelbeard1 (talk) 21:12, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

The thing is that many people still know him as Trane and these people shouldn't have the HVAC company article just pop up when looking up the word "Trane"... smells a little like spam, won't you agree? Being non-American, I personally felt awkward when that was my search result and I am positive many others felt and will feel the same way. Although his name was never officially fully substituted, he is still known to many as Trane and it is a good reason for the dab page to exist, just like with Satchmo (the company's popularity plays little importance). Hearfourmewesique (talk) 06:16, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

If you look at any article about John Coltrane, they are listed under his real name instead of his nickname. There are examples in which the nickname is more prominent than the real name such as Buffalo Bill instead of William Cody. That's why the Wikipedia article for William Cody is actually called Buffalo Bill. Steelbeard1 (talk) 18:49, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Group or band – which one?

We are holding a straw poll (in a very friendly way, of course) to decide if The Beatles should be called a group, or a band. You can add your user signature to one or the other by clicking this link, Group or band – which one?. Thanks.--andreasegde (talk) 23:46, 19 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.181.171.159 (talk)

Re: Grammar (Love Me Do)

I'm not sure what the rules on transatlantic dialect conventions are, but, in UK English, one says "in Abbey Road" rather than the American "on Abbey Road" Solicitr (talk) 20:04, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Steelbeard1. You have new messages at TomCat4680's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

File:Elektralogo.png

Hey, just letting you know, please don't revert my version without giving a reason. I spent a lot of time using GIMP to cut out the white edges, you know not trying to leave a lot of empty space as most of the logos on here leave no empty space, so it looks bigger. That's all. --Taylor Karras (talk) 00:27, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Replied in his talk page. Steelbeard1 (talk) 02:09, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Steelbeard1. You have new messages at Taylor Karras's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Labels

Hey there, I was refereed to you by User:TenPoundHammer, who believes you can provide some insight into the following record label issue. Imperatore (talk) 01:00, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I have replied here. Imperatore (talk) 02:18, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I have now moved the discussion to my talk page so that it won't intrude on TenPoundHammer. You can respond there if you wish. Imperatore (talk) 21:59, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the facts under "columbia pictures", but that section was for a completely unrelated discussion to the record companies which I started on User:King Shadeed's page. Do you still have any suggestions for the previous issue surrounding Celine? Imperatore (talk) 03:29, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Rcaredseal.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Rcaredseal.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

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 Wikipedia 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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? –Dream out loud (talk) 21:40, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Apology

I have flipped a couple of times between accusing you of being stubborn regarding a change I proposed, to acknowledging that you were correct, or the problem was not as great as it first appeared to me. Now I'm apologizing again, and I withdraw any accusations made. I do a lot of editing on music related articles, and feel most of my edits are done properly and are well researched, and I don't often make accusations like the ones I made about you. In fact I often jump in to mediate when others make accusations over a misunderstanding. Please accept my apology, and hope to see you around on WP pages. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 19:04, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Accepted. Steelbeard1 (talk) 19:10, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Please check the FFEIC list.

Please see entry 48 in the FFEIC table at http://www.ffiec.gov/nicpubweb/nicweb/Top50Form.aspx to find City National Bank of California (whose . Someone must have missed this bank holding company when revamping this template for the June 30, 2009 update, and forgot to remove Webster Bank, the former #51 until Colonial failed. Colonial is now nowhere in that table. Jesse Viviano (talk) 21:14, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

He is right about Colonial Bancgroup being replaced by City National Bank (California) on the source. I was very surprised to see that the FFIEC did a mid-quarter update of the list without changing the "as of" date. — Kralizec! (talk) 07:29, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Steelbeard1 (talk) 10:55, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Sony Music

Hey again. I noticed you made some modifications to the history section of Sony Music which I had tweaked over the summer months. The problem right now is in the first paragraph as its contradictory, suggesting it can trace back to 1888, but in the following phrase, to 1929 (which you added). I figured you have more input and knowledge on the history so let me know how we can remedy this. Imperatore (talk) 04:51, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I'll take a look at the early history section again to see if I can clarify the text further. Steelbeard1 (talk) 12:28, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Nice! Seems coherent enough now. Imperatore (talk) 17:31, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

The details on Date Records and other historical subsidiaries are nice, but seeing as the article is still very brief, I think including such details makes it look less comprehensive / not getting to the core of things??? Just wanna confirm if these historical/discontinued "sublabels" are notable for the evolution of "sony music". Ultimately, I think the juice of the company history lies in the Columbia Records article; definitely would be appropriate to transfer some info as the columbia article is very well detailed, albeit disorganized at the moment. Imperatore (talk) 02:13, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

As for what is more appropriate for Columbia and more appropriate for Sony Music depends on the time frame. Okeh was acquired by Columbia so it fits in the Columbia article. Epic is considered to be a sister label of Columbia, as was Date. So Epic and Date are more suitable for the Sony Music article. I hope this helps to clear things up. Steelbeard1 (talk) 02:29, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Release History for digital

I noticed a pervasive issue with the release history table on albums. Digital format release is usually a common date across all territories of the big four for high profile releases, whereas physical release can vary significantly. On I Look to You for example, the digital release date is the same date under major and minor Sony Music markets, with the exception of the UK under RCA UK in October (justified by iTunes). But as the format reads now, it would appear that the digital release is in-line with the physical release date. Any suggestions?? Maybe wp:albums can help? Imperatore (talk) 23:45, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

We can ask for consensus in the appropriate talk pages. I believe physical media release dates should prevail over digital download release dates. Steelbeard1 (talk) 02:29, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

i would like to add some input since i sourced the majority of the european and international releases for this album. In my experience it varies country by country. what tends to happen especially under Sony Music (whereby the artist is signed to a label who's parent company is sony) is that Sony Music distributes and markets the album in European Countries. The general case appears to be that continental Europe recieves the physical release of an album before the US and UK. With I Look to You the A&R was done Arista Records and so Arista focusses the release in the US - often the US recieves the download at the same time as the physical release. However Arista releases in the UK in partnership with RCA records whom have an unpredicatable pattern in their release dates. For example Ciara's Fantasy Ride was released to Amazon Download on the May 3, iTunes May 4 and CD May 5. As for trying to reach a consensus the only point i would like to make is that sometimes it is difficult to source exact download and physical releases for an album. Sometimes it is only possible to source one and not the other. With the case of I Look to You i refrained from using itunes because it is not accessible to everyone, i chose instead to search for the largest music retailers in those countries and source release dates from there which proven to mostly be phsyical CD releases. If individual release dates can be found for digital and CD releases then they should both be listed however in reality often only one of the release formats is usually found and properly sourced. both Amazon and iTunes confirm that the album is not released till october, something which i cannot understand personally. I hope this has helped. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 01:05, 5 September 2009 (UTC))

Can the discussion be switched over to the appropriate talk page(s) concerning this subject? Steelbeard1 (talk) 01:16, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Post Masters

Hi, Steelbeard1. I think you might want to have a look at this, please. The remastered CD of Past Masters excludes from the previous versions three songs: "The Ballad of John and Yoko", its B-side "Old Brown Shoe" and "Let It Be". Now, "Let It Be" is, of course, included on the album of the same name. What's missing, however, from this collection are the other two songs. Am I correct? That is very strange about this. Best, --Discographer (talk) 23:14, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Disregard, Steelbeard1...I see, it's the mono version. Chat at you later. Best, --Discographer (talk) 23:29, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Goodbye

Hi, Steelbeard1. Well, the way the remastered series has the comma is our answer. You have the honours...Best, --Discographer (talk) 08:52, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Steelbeard, I took comma back out. It only makes common sense in not having the comma in the song title, as practically everything there is does't show it anyway. Even the remastered series doesn't have it. That's definative enough. Best, --Discographer (talk) 13:48, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, bad news: The German single for "Hello, Goodbye" (see its Talk page) ahows the comma, though Magical Mystery Tour doesn't. Also, the compact disc for the remastered album shows it too. Best, --Discographer (talk) 20:46, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

The Beatles discography

Hi Steelbeard... I was wondering might you have a look at (click-on) this and see what you think. Best, --Discographer (talk) 12:38, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

The idea is sound, there are flaws which some people would comment on. My quibble is with the "canon albums" list with its inclusion of MMT and PM. Of course MMT was issued as a double EP in the UK and not initially as an LP was it was in the USA. PM was initally issued as two separate CDs and a double LP in 1988 and is considered to be a compilation as opposed to an original album in order to get The Beatles' entire musical output on CD along with the MMT album. Of course, PM was reissued as a double CD in 2009 along with the original British albums and the MMT album as compiled by Capitol in the USA. Steelbeard1 (talk) 14:46, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

I know the biggest concern is with PM, that it is just a comp. album and also what you've said. The only reason I've included it is for the sake of discographical completeness concerning all their singles/songs, and had it not been included in The Beatles Stereo Box Set. However, if the majority of the veteran editors (yourself) of which I'm seeking concensus on in this do not want PM listed, I will remove it without any questions asked. Thanks! Best, --Discographer (talk) 15:29, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

You could add footnotes to MMT and PM to give such info as MMT making the British charts as an American import and that PM was a double compilation album originally issued on separate CDs and a double LP in 1988 to ensure that The Beatles' entire commercial output from EMI was available on CD.

I took your advice, and done just that. I see you have 120 edits done on The Beatles discography, being the only person who has more edits than me. Anyway, the point I'm trying to make, is ...I'm asking... if you could please help me on my sandbox page, and maybe we can turn this discography into an FL status one. I know you can write good (and good narrative prose), maybe you can work on the prose like you've done for the original discography, or do what you feel needs improved, I won't mind. So, you have my permission to edit on that sandbox page, if you like, and when it's all done, maybe we can transfer it over in place of the discography that's already there. I need and want help on this, and you're the best! Thanks! (Awaiting your response} Best, --Discographer (talk) 20:42, 28 September 2009 (UTC) Steelbeard1 (talk) 01:46, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Also, what do you think about having the track-listings shown for the canon albums? (Curious). Best, --Discographer (talk) 21:25, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

First of all, those footnotes should have <ref>...</ref> right after the title requiring the footnote so users will look for the footnote info. The canon albums can have the track listings. Those revisions I made were made over a period of months and years so I don't know if I have the time to make major changes all at once.

I'd like to work alingside with you and put these track listings in, though I was hoping that might you take care of the refs and anything else you think needs done. You are absolutely correct in that this will take time to do, as I was hoping for it to be done and out by the start of the new decade... so, there's no rush at all. I know there's still much to be done, and I think with us working together on this that we can turn it into a Featured List. I'd rather go about doing this slowly and making sure everything we have is correct, and also that nothing is left out. As you can see, the music videos list is far from done (directors, references). I really would like to make this not only the best we can, but the best appearance-wise too. Thanks! Best, --Discographer (talk) 05:34, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Would it be OK to shift this discussion to Talk:The Beatles discography? Steelbeard1 (talk) 10:40, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Sure it'd be O.K. Also, I'm about done with the canon track listings. Best, --Discographer (talk) 19:08, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

The Beatles discography Wikipedia:Featured list candidates

Hi, Steelbeard1! I have nominated our discography for FL. Please, if you don't mind, clicking on the above link and show your support for it on that page. Thanks my friend! Best, --Discographer (talk) 03:12, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I've withdrawn nomination for now. Best, --Discographer (talk) 19:39, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I had noticed there were issues with the article in the comments showing it needs additional work before it is nominated again. Steelbeard1 (talk) 20:19, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Hickory Records

Okay, thanks for that. The article didn't make it clear so it seemed fishy to me that there was a 30+year gap in the chronology. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 13:29, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Reply

There is a difference between what publishing credits say and who actually wrote a given song, especially if sources verify that thet two differ. For comparison's sake, film articles always indicate actual writing credits in the infobox, regardless of what the "official" credits are. See WP:Verifiability. WesleyDodds (talk) 07:50, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Because I help maintain the "Hey Jude" article, given I rewrote it when it underwent Featured Article Review. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:58, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

You have not established proof of any standard being established on Wikipedia. So far the only standard seems to be "who wrote it". WesleyDodds (talk) 03:25, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

"Hey Jude"

Oh, I was only fixing the link in the notes via the infobox. I'd nothing to do with the actual article itself. Best, --Discographer (talk) 17:19, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Elektrabox.jpg

I have tagged File:Elektrabox.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Some examples can be found at Wikipedia:Use rationale examples. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Non-free. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 14:52, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Done. Steelbeard1 (talk) 14:59, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Let Be and Get Back infoboxes

I am glad you like the solution of using two infoboxes, and I appreciate your help making them accurate. — John Cardinal (talk) 16:21, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

So am I. Thanks again. Steelbeard1 (talk) 16:44, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

List of HMV POP artists

Hi, I've started an HMV list too. You may wish to change the alphabetical style, I'm easy. Same with the Parlophone list. Rothorpe (talk) 18:47, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Fever

It pleases me to tell you that you have my full support for the merge. Whether it will happen is another matter. Maybe AfD would sort it out? --Richhoncho (talk) 23:01, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:TheBeatlesBoxSet.JPG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:TheBeatlesBoxSet.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:39, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Pastmasters2label.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Pastmasters2label.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:44, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Pastmasters1label.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Pastmasters1label.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:03, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Pastmastersvol1and2albumcover.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Pastmastersvol1and2albumcover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:08, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Disambiguation of songs

You recently opposed a suggestion to disambiguate songs by year, rather than artist or performer, something which I am in favour of. Perhaps you would like to revisit the discussion and add more weight to your arguments (or better still, change your mind!). I'd like to add it to the guidelines, but as you are the major dissenter I thought you should be given a chance to elucidate further, make alternative suggestions or as you feel. The discussion is at WikiProject Songs. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 21:13, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Epicrecords.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Epicrecords.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ZooFari 03:38, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

RE: Edit war

Unfortunately I am not familiar enough with Wikipedia policies and procedures in the realm of music content to be able to weigh in on this issue. Sorry, — Kralizec! (talk) 14:00, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Mcanashvillelogo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Mcanashvillelogo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:34, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Steelbeard1! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to this article, it would greatly help us with the current 828 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Eddie Hodges - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 20:12, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

" somehow the reply is not appearing"

Steelbeard1, I am not sure what you mean by your editto my talk page with the comment " somehow the reply is not appearing". I see your edit from a week or so ago (a message about Das), then an entry by Das today, then my response to Das. What's not appearing? — John Cardinal (talk) 01:25, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

I saw Das' reply and was about to reply to that when I saw that your reply (similar to what I was about to write) was already in the editing area. I returned to the talk page and your reply disappeared. I noticed the double space between Das' reply and your reply so I removed the extra spacing and your reply appeared on the talk page. Steelbeard1 (talk) 03:14, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Hmm. My reply was visible when I looked at the page. Anyway, all's well that ends well. — John Cardinal (talk) 04:06, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

EMI Group Ltd should remain as EMI

Steelbeard1, you're an expert on record music labels; see this redirect/move done by Electron9 concerning EMI. Personally, I thought it was okay where it was at, which was EMI. Best, --Discographer (talk) 09:48, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes. The article name should be EMI. Steelbeard1 (talk) 11:37, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi Steelbeaerd1, I also left a note on LessHeard vanU's talk page about Electon9's EMI move. It absolutely must be changed back to EMI, or we'd have hundreds (maybe thousands!) of articles to change just to avoid re-directs! Best, --Discographer (talk) 20:28, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Le Historie de Populaire Musica

Hi my friend, read (click-on) this if you will, and let me know what you think. Thanks. Best, --Discographer (talk) 23:28, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

We could possibly create a timeline of the music labels from past to present that now make up the big four. It could be based on The Beatles timeline. You've provided UMG's on John Cardinal's talk page, if maybe you get the other three, then maybe we can "copy" them together to form one single timeline for Wikipedia. We'd only have four sources to use as each of the big four's own timeline would qualify as its own source. John and I can set the timeline up as to where you can put it together with our help. What do you say about that? (Hello, Nipper!) Best, --Discographer (talk) 08:10, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

I found the Warner Music Group timeline dating back to the founding of Chappell & Company in 1811, the forerunner of Warner/Chappell Music, at http://mobile.wmg.com/wmglinks?page=aboutwmg&subpage=timeline Steelbeard1 (talk) 11:44, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay my friend, two down and two to go. Also, what should this timeline be called? Music industry record labels timeline? Or something else. Best, --Discographer (talk) 22:29, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

I left a note on John's talk page (please see)! Also, do you know which countries correspond to these four WWII devices: ULTRA, MAGIC, PURPLE, ENIGMA? Best, --Discographer (talk) 19:39, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

MGM Nashville.

Definite hoax; read here. No way would Metro Goldwyn Mayer let some small label use the same name. Found absolutely no evidence of a Brian Keith country singer at all, much less on that label. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 20:05, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Get Back

Thank you for pointing that out, I didn't know there is a different version. But, by the way isn't almost every single got "single version"/"radio version" of the song? I think they're still considered single from/to promote the album.

For example, The Boy with the Thorn in His Side (song), by The Smiths, which got an "alternate mix" for the single.
Atomic (song) from Blondie, which got 7`` mix, and whole many other I think.

They still considered from the album, rite? CMIIW
But Thanks hey. passport90## (talk) 04:44, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

The Beatles discography singles

Hi old Steelbeard1, quick question here, is there such a thing as "canon" singles, and also would that go thru "Let It Be" or "The Long and Winding Road" or something else, and include EMI-only releases worldwide, or just British? Also, since I truly believe you are the most knowledgable person in all of Wikipedia on this very subject, what changes, personally that is, would you (like to) bring about The Beatles discography, if any? Yes, I am curious, as you set the original precedent for this whole thing. Best, --Discographer (talk) 20:28, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

This gets complicated as some of The Beatles' biggest hits (think "Eight Days A Week" and "Yesterday" as examples) were not issued as singles in the UK. Steelbeard1 (talk) 21:30, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Only UK singles are considered canon then, I take it. That's understandable. Best, --Discographer (talk) 21:34, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

P.S. I can't see any changes that need to be made to The Beatles discography, as I find it "complete". How about you? (I will go along with any ruling you make, but no one else!) Best, --Discographer (talk) 21:39, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I think so. Steelbeard1 (talk) 21:40, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, my friend! So much for the discussions on that talk page! Oh well! Best, --Discographer (talk) 21:43, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Columbia/Epic Label Group

You have done some work on the Columbia label, so maybe you can look at recent edits to Columbia/Epic Label Group and see if they are valid. I can't tell because the article has no references. Another editor changed year of founding from 2009 to 2003. I reverted because the change was incomplete (and it's still incomplete; the category still says companies founded in 2009). The editor put it back, and also identified a 2003 album on the label, which I suspect is the reason for the change. The article now alleges this is the label's first release, but there is no citation for this, and the album's article does not mention it. This could just be a guess on the part of the editor. What we really need are some references for the whole article. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 12:33, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Finding on line journalistic citations is difficult for this article. The Sony Music web sites do not have a Columbia/Epic Label Group URL, there are separate URLs for the Columbia and Epic imprints. Steelbeard1 (talk) 12:54, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Gubernatorial Troll

I'd reported the gubernatorial troll, too, but for whatever reason, the entry isn't showing on that page. --Criticalthinker (talk) 03:05, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

The entry found at [2], like all entries, have internal links. The fun part was finding each example from the edit history to past them for the report. Steelbeard1 (talk) 10:56, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Beatlescoll2.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Beatlescoll2.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file 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 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" 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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:41, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Done. Steelbeard1 (talk) 21:48, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Levin

Looks like someone beat me to it. Best — e. ripley\^talk 02:16, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Columbiajapan.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Columbiajapan.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:15, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Jewel Records (Shreveport record label)

Can you please explain to me why you didn't approve of the source I gave you concerning the fact that Jewel Records had a subsidiary label named Sue? You were right when you wrote on the discussion page that the wikipedia article Sue Records had nothing to do with Jewel Records but there really was an unrelated subsidiary label called Sue which is confirmed on two different pages in the "Encyclopedia of the Blues", page 523 and page 937. --Popiloll (talk) 19:49, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Because it was not made clear that it was a different Sue Records and the citation was NOT verifiable. Steelbeard1 (talk) 19:59, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

What do you want me to do? I can't help that the Encyclopedia of the Blues is not available for reading in Google books. I will get back to you if and when I find a link. --Popiloll (talk) 20:24, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I've found a link here. Write 588 or 1002 in the rectangle right above the book and push enter and that will prove that I'm right. --Popiloll (talk) 20:48, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm afraid a review of the cited book at [3] says otherwise. Steelbeard1 (talk) 22:38, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps any of the sources given by the encyclopedia could corroborate the statement; Blues Access Magazine no.26 (1996) and Living Blues Magazine no.141 (1998). However, they are not available anywhere on the web unless you buy them. --Popiloll (talk) 05:40, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

I've searched everywhere on the web and I can't find another source that mentions the sublabel Sue. It could have been a very short-lived label for all I know. If you still don't believe in the existence of a subsidiary called Sue despite the fact that it's written in an encyclopedia, feel free to remove that info and I won't interfere. I think I've proven my point. --Popiloll (talk) 06:15, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

A linkable citation was found that Sue Records of Louisiana owned Jewel/Paula/Ronn Records at one time. Steelbeard1 (talk) 14:35, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Cameoparkwaylogo.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Cameoparkwaylogo.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, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:32, 9 June 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:32, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 17:48, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Instant Records

I have re-taged the Instant Records article for {{notability}} as I don't think the company meets WP:CORP or WP:ORG, I agree that http://www.bsnpubs.com/imperial/minit.html is coverage but not what could be called significant. Codf1977 (talk) 15:44, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Y

Hello. I like the compromise of The Y (disambiguation). I still think that it's an unlikely search term but if any reader does make that search, the new dab page will be exactly what he needs. Cheers, Pichpich (talk) 17:56, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Theylogo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Theylogo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:06, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Merge discussion for Manfred_Mann

An article that you have been involved in editing, Manfred_Mann , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. KoshVorlonNaluboutes,Aeria Gloris 17:03, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Monument Records

Did I add a speedy delete to the Monument Records page? I didn't intend to do so. I need some help here. I am trying to amend the page as the information as originally presented on the page was incorrect. My husband was a partner in the Corporation. If I must cite SEC records I will. Can you please tell me how to so? TeenkingTeenking (talk) 01:53, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I've never edited the Manfred Mann page. What the? -teenkingTeenking (talk) 01:59, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

You forgot to add a new heading. Steelbeard1 (talk) 02:24, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Dorothyshay.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Dorothyshay.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 02:53, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Sorry - Sugar Hill

Sorry, I was messing up your editing while you were doing it on the Sugar Hill page. I'll stay out! Airproofing (talk) 15:12, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:7uplogousa.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:7uplogousa.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:14, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Talk:The Beatles discography

Hi Steelbeard1! Care to vote on this matter concerning the song "Something" (peak position)? Thanks! Best, --Discographer (talk) 20:53, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Beatles members

Ok. Thank you for clearing that up for me. --PhillieLWillie(Talk) 22:14, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Garpax

Is there anyway I can see what was posted that Steelbeard1 edited? Garpax is an important and interesting topic. I'd like to know what was thrown out. I wonder if there may have been a baby in the bath water? Teenking (talk) 00:14, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

The edit was to the Garpax Records article and what was deleted was material not related whatsoever to the record label called Garpax which was founded by Gary S. Paxton. The Garpax name was derived from his name. Steelbeard1 (talk) 10:36, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Love Me Do

Since there were two separate versions of "Love Me Do," I thought it was important to note which single it was, and that the single included on 1 was the same as the album, as opposed to the non-album version. Why is this unnecessary? 98.221.129.63 (talk) 05:54, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Because we are talking about single releases, not album releases. It is common knowledge that the "Andy White" version is the more prevalent version of "Love Me Do" from the album releases. The version with Ringo on drums was the first version released as a single in the UK that peaked at #17 in 1963. The song's article is the place to note the differences between the two songs. So to note that the version that was #1 in the US in 1964 is the one with Andy White on drums and Ringo Starr on tambourine is sufficient detail for the "1" article. The song's article is more appropriate to note the additional details. Steelbeard1 (talk) 12:50, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_The_Beatles#The_The_Beatles

I think your comments here are a little heavy handed. You are free to have an opinion but I would refrain from characterizing other editors as such. Can we keep this discussion free of personal attacks and just let it run its course? thanks! riffic (talk) 13:35, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

I think Steelbeard1 is doing exactly what is needed to clarify the situation. His evidence about trademarks has been ignored for far too long.--andreasegde (talk) 21:43, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

comparing fellow editors to a 'Taliban' is not very civil. riffic (talk) 00:32, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your noun vs adjective comment, Steelbeard1; very valid point. I would say that raises the score on your side. It's funny how this topic is more interesting than it sounds like it would be! —Prhartcom (talk) 19:08, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Happywanderer.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Happywanderer.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file 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 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:21, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ua liberty logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ua liberty logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:44, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Proprietariness of Nielsen rankings

The removal of the Neilsen rankings were due to a request filed by Neilsen in 2008, in which all information considered proprietary to Neilsen must be removed, including rankings. This eventually led to the wholesale deletion of TV market templates, all because it contains the ranking number. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television Stations/Archive 8 has more information on this matter. -- azumanga (talk) 06:39, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Johnfogertymillenium.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Johnfogertymillenium.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 05:24, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Blood libel

Thanks for the restoration. I wondered why, as no one has ever deleted a comment by me from a Talk page. And altho we have our differences, I didn't think you were that kind of guy. Cheers.Bellagio99 (talk) 19:42, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Epicrecords90s.png, File:Epicrecords70s.png and File:First epic logo.png

Hi there. I have concerns about the validity of the rationale for File:Epicrecords90s.png, File:Epicrecords70s.png and File:First epic logo.png. Since only File:Epicrecords-logo.png and File:Epicrecords.jpg are currently used, I don't believe the rest fall under the fair use rationale "to identify the organization Epic Records". I'm sure you know the drill. Best regards. Muhandes (talk) 12:14, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Autopatrolled

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:

• This permission does not give you any special status or authority
• Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
• You may wish to display the {{Autopatrolled}} top icon and/or the {{User wikipedia/autopatrolled}} userbox on your user page
• If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it

If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing!HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 04:32, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Whirlpoolcorp2010logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Whirlpoolcorp2010logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:18, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

M-21 (Michigan highway)

There have been 4 designs of highway marker in Michigan. The first was created in 1919. The second (called by the "M-old" type in the infobox) was created around 1926 or 1927. The third around 1948, and the current design in the early 1970s. M-56 would have been decommissioned in 1984 with the modern design, which is why its infobox in the M-21 article uses the current style, not the older cutouts like M-21A or M-210. Imzadi 1979 → 03:24, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Producedbygeorgemartinhighlights.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Producedbygeorgemartinhighlights.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 03:57, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Nipponcolumbialogo.gif

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Nipponcolumbialogo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 04:37, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Nipponcolumbialogo.gif

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Nipponcolumbialogo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 04:39, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:7uplogousa.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:7uplogousa.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 06:01, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

The

Nice revert. I reverted the talk page as well.--andreasegde (talk) 16:40, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

)) "First solo recording". I thought I was wrong about that, so thanks for putting it right!--andreasegde (talk) 15:15, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom Request

You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Disruption at The Beatles article and talkpage and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Requests for Arbitration;
• Wikipedia:Arbitration guide.

Thanks, LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:29, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Arbcom case regarding The Beatles

Hi Steelbeard1, this is just a friendly notification to inform you that the Arbitration Commitee has declined to hear the case regarding The Beatles to which you were a party. Cheers. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 12:12, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

The Long and Winding Road

Thanks, as always. :)--andreasegde (talk) 21:12, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Past Masters

It might be a good idea to lower the tone a bit: "I would not call tracks such as..." being a case in point. It's al the about the article. :) --andreasegde (talk) 21:48, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

I was influenced by the collection's compiler Mark Lewisohn when he stated in the original 1988 liner notes' conclusion: "...Don't fall under the illusion that these songs are mere 'fillers'. 'She Loves You', 'I Want To Hold Your Hand', 'I Feel Fine', 'We Can Work It Out', 'Hey Jude' and many others like them didn't exactly wallow in the lower reaches of the chart." when I deleted the word 'rarities' as a description of the compilation. Steelbeard1 (talk) 22:20, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Vernors...

...is already on my watch list. Thanks for the heads-up. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:28, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

re: Vernors article

Thanks for the note. I haven't defended the Halo Burger info since I'm undecided whether it is sufficiently notable for inclusion. Also, I'm not sure that photos on Flickr constitute reliable sources. Please don't count on me for its defense. Thanks, Kevin Forsyth (talk) 22:03, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Notification of Automated Replies

Hey Steelbeard1,

This is a friendly notification to inform you that automated notices are submitted to reported users on the WP:AN/EW noticeboard by User:NekoBot periodically during reviews of the page content to save editors from having to post their own notices and directly link to the report in question. Please see Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/NekoBot and User:NekoBot for more information. + Crashdoom ^{Talk // NekoBot OP} 18:20, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

(message from Rc Cola Girl forwarded to Administrators' Noticeboard.) Steelbeard1 (talk) 16:22, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Non-Free rationale for File:Jimmymacdonalddvd.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Jimmymacdonalddvd.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under Non-Free content criteria but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a Non-Free rationale.

If you have uploaded other Non-Free media, consider checking that you have specified the Non-Free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:21, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Atlanticrecordslogo.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Atlanticrecordslogo.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) 16:11, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Whirlpoolcorp2010logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Whirlpoolcorp2010logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:14, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Whirlpoolcorp2010logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Whirlpoolcorp2010logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:32, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Cavern performances

I was wondering about exactly how many times the Fabs played at The Cavern Club. It says 292 appearances, but if you look here, I only count 14 times. They played from 1961 to 1963, which is only two-and-a-half years. Any ideas?--andreasegde (talk) 09:31, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

No idea. We need to find a reliable source to settle on a number. Steelbeard1 (talk) 11:56, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Possible fair-use rationale issue for File:Emicolumbiamagicnotes.jpg

I'm not formally flagging it as a fair-use violation because my research indicates it was an IP-address editor who added your File:Emicolumbiamagicnotes.jpg image to the Columbia Records (US/current Sony Music label) article quite some time back. However, the image *only* has a fair-use rationale for the Columbia Graphophone Company (UK/former EMI label) article, *not* Columbia Records.

It would be easy enough to copy your Columbia Graphophone fair-use rationale for Columbia Records--especially since it's a rather unique version of the "magic notes" logo (the only one I've seen to have "Columbia Records" written ON the notes themselves) *and* much of the technical details are the same since Sony bought out EMI's rights--but all that's listed about the source of your image is "scanned album cover", presumably from a Columbia Graphophone release *but* of unknown age.

If it's from the pre-1931 period (Columbia US spun off Columbia UK in 1922, but Columbia UK turned around and bought Columbia US in 1925 before being forced to divest it in the 1931 EMI merger), it's probably appropriate for the Columbia US article and the fair-use rationale should be copied with relevant modifications (i.e., title change and rewording the ownership statement for US relevance). However, if it really *IS* from an EMI-era Columbia UK (1931-73) release, it's irrelevant to the Columbia US article and should be removed from there. (It shouldn't be deleted as it IS appropriate for the Columbia UK article.) --RBBrittain (talk) 08:51, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Haloburger.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Haloburger.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:56, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Official vs. common name

Hello - I was wondering if you had a chance to read WP:OFFICIAL and its interpretation of WP:NAMING, and what your thoughts were about it. Thanks. Dohn joe (talk) 17:59, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

My opinion is unchanged. Steelbeard1 (talk) 18:13, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

That's fine, but do you at least agree that your opinion is at odds with Wikipedia policy? Dohn joe (talk) 18:19, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Look at the record label at [4]. Once again, my opinion is unchanged. Steelbeard1 (talk) 18:27, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Listen, I agree with you that "The Beatles" is the official name of the album, and "The White Album" is a nickname. What I'm saying is that we don't always use the official name of something for the title. Please read WP:COMMONNAME to see what Wikipedia policy is. For example, the official name of Rhode Island is State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. But we put the article at Rhode Island because that's what people call it. Same here - everyone agrees that "The Beatles" is the official name. But because everyone calls it The White Album, that's where the title should be. Does that make any sense? Dohn joe (talk) 18:48, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

No it does not. The short name of Rhode Island is indeed the common name with the full name used mainly on the state seal. OTOH, there is no record label for this album anywhere in the world that says "The White Album." Steelbeard1 (talk) 21:18, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

I understand. But my question to that would be, what makes record labels the only place we should look when we decide how to title an article? Dohn joe (talk) 21:29, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Because the record label is is the OFFICIAL LAST WORD on how to describe the contents of an album. Album covers may contain erroneous material as in the case of the original Beatles for Sale LP which lists the "Kansas City/Hey Hey Hey Hey" medley simply as "Kansas City." When the error was noted, it was corrected on the record label, but not the sleeve, although the correction was made on the packaging of future configurations of the Beatles for Sale album. Steelbeard1 (talk) 21:36, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

But my question is, why should we listen to the official last word for Beatles albums, when we regularly ignore other official last words - like state seals, birth certificates, official titles of laws, etc. - when they aren't the common name? What makes this case different? Dohn joe (talk) 21:58, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

It still does not say "The White Album" on the sleeve and record label. Didn't you read my previous comment? Or do you prefer to ignore all the links I gave? Steelbeard1 (talk) 01:14, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi Steelbeard - I wanted to say, first of all, that I very much appreciate all the research and links that you have provided on a number of occasions that show that the official name of the album is, and always has been, "The Beatles". As I've told you before, I agree with you. To me, there is absolutely, positively no doubt whatsoever that the official name is "The Beatles". "The White Album" is a popular name for the album, and has never been the official name of the album. I agree with you on that 100%.

So, why do I keep arguing to change the article name to "The White Album"? Because Wikipedia does not always use the official name for article titles. It is Wikipedia's policy to give preference to common names. Not my policy - Wikipedia's. Sometimes there are good reasons to use an official name. But "because it's official" is not one of those good reasons. Does that make any sense at all? I'd suggest looking at Sarek's arguments in opposition and LtPower's arguments in favor to get a sense of what Wikipedia policy says. And finally, once more - thanks for your diligence in compiling the links and official references. Dohn joe (talk) 21:32, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

The common name is not the official name. The redirect from the common name to the official name is sufficient and need not be changed. Also, for the sake of brevity, the official name is shorter than the popular name. But that does not preclude making the shorter popular name the name of the article. CCR goes to a disambig page and directs the reader to go to the Creedence Clearwater Revival article, for example. Steelbeard1 (talk) 21:38, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Okay, but let me ask you this, and forget music and the Beatles for now: do you agree that there are times when Wikipedia chooses the common name instead of the official name? Dohn joe (talk) 21:42, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Actually it is NOT Wikipedia which decides, it's a consensus of editors of the article in question. An anal retentive member of the MOS police tried to rename the ABN AMRO article into "ABN Amro" to the chagrin of ABN AMRO followers such as myself as I was a customer of an ABN AMRO bank before that bank was sold. The official name is ABN AMRO in all-capital letters. The Talk:ABN AMRO page is still longer than the actual article because of the edit warring. Steelbeard1 (talk) 21:47, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Okay, now we're getting somewhere. So, would it be fair to say that there are no policies or guidelines that you would ever find binding on an editor of Wikipedia? Or is that going too far? If so, what do you have to say about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines? Dohn joe (talk) 21:57, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Actually, there is a good Wikipedia guideline, in which "policy" loses to prevailing consensus: WP:IAR. Steelbeard1 (talk) 22:00, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

So if it turns out that whoever closes the discussion at Talk:The Beatles (album) decides that consensus wants it at The White Album, you'd be okay with that? Dohn joe (talk) 22:05, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

If there is no consensus, and that this stage there is no consensus, the article stays as it is with the title The Beatles (album). Steelbeard1 (talk) 22:07, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

I agree. But I asked you a what if. Dohn joe (talk) 22:09, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Again, no consensus means article stays the same. ¿Comprende? Steelbeard1 (talk) 22:13, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

RE:August 2011

Thank you, captain obvious, I did not notice from my watchlist, till u told me. :P --Yeepsi (Talk to me!) 14:23, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

As I own a copy of 20 Greatest Hits (Parlophone version, to be exact), mine didn't come with an EP. Am I missing the EP? --Yeepsi (Talk to me!) 14:47, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

I believe it was a limited edition EP when it was originally released. Steelbeard1 (talk) 15:17, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

I believe you got ripped off because all eBay listings of this album include the EP. Steelbeard1 (talk) 15:29, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Well, I'm rather annoyed now. --Yeepsi (Talk to me!) 15:36, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Do you have a later repackaging? The citation shows a 20-track LP and the 3-track EP complete with front and back cover photos. Steelbeard1 (talk) 16:10, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

I'll pull my copy off the shelf and get back to u, in a few mins. --Yeepsi (Talk to me!) 17:27, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

I have a first pressing, all first pressings apparently don't come with the EP (I've been cross referencing with Discogs). --Yeepsi (Talk to me!) 17:37, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

As u may have noticed the links are now less likely to rot. --Yeepsi (Talk to me!) 18:27, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi, yes me again. To quote wat I added to the talk of The Number Ones. "Should we add the tracklist for the cassette version as well? It's different." --Yeepsi (Talk to me!) 15:06, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, along with mention in the text that the cassette version contains all 23 tracks because cassettes do not have the length limitations which LPs have. Steelbeard1 (talk) 16:42, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Should we include an image of the EP cover? --Yeepsi (Talk to me!) 15:32, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Looking the EP sleeve, is it similar to the gatefold design inside the LP sleeve? If so, yes. Steelbeard1 (talk) 16:39, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Alright, I've added the image, tell me wat u think. --Yeepsi (Talk to me!) 21:50, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

It should have a caption such as "Bonus EP sleeve." Steelbeard1 (talk) 02:46, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Yea, um.. I don't know how to add captions. --Yeepsi (Talk to me!) 14:10, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Caption has been added. Steelbeard1 (talk) 15:30, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Michigan 2012 Senate race

Thank you for contacting me. I see what you mean. It appears that the two editors that are adding that info are the same, there usernames are very similar. I am going to go ahead and give "final warnings" to both, let them know I suspect they are the same person, and the next time, I will take it up to WP:AIV. Thank you again for contacting me. I have your back here. America69 (talk) 02:42, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Lennon/McCartney or Lennon–McCartney

There is a discussion here where we could use your input. Thanks. CuriousEric 23:41, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

The Beatles/Years Active

There is a discussion occuring here involving debate about whether or not the Beatles were "active" during 1994-1996. Your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 22:47, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

WJRT-TV

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to WJRT-TV. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. TomCat4680 (talk) 17:22, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

"Free as a Bird" proposed lede change

FYI, there is a vote taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 03:18, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Pendleton Woolen Mills, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Glacier National Park (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:06, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

December 2011

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Citizen Kane. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. -- Doniago (talk) 17:00, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Reverted your removal and added citations. Read your talk page. Steelbeard1 (talk) 17:09, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Replied. Thank you for providing sources. Doniago (talk) 17:28, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Chess Records logo

Hi Steelbeard1. Could you tell us what the logo represents? Maybe that could be added to the article? Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:32, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

This is the current logo, dating back to the 1960s, used by the current owner of the Chess catalogue and trademark, Universal Music Group, at the official Chess web site at http://www.chessrecords.co.uk/ Steelbeard1 (talk) 22:47, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, thanks, all good stuff. But I meant figuratively, what does it depict. Or what was it's inspiration. It looks a little like an amonite, or perhaps even a seahorse, but (of course?) not much like any chess piece. Maybe no-one knows. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:17, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

It's a stylized knight chess piece. Steelbeard1 (talk) 01:30, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh I see. Any reason for the Knight? Is there a source which says this? - it wasn't completely obvious to me! Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:43, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

If you look at the old blue and white Chess label from the official Chess Records web site, the three chess pieces shown on the label include a knight. Steelbeard1 (talk) 12:05, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that's quite clear. But the "current" version, which appears in the article info box is, as you say, quite stylized. If there is no citable source which describes the logo and/or its origins, would it be WP:OR to add a summary of what you have just explained above? Or maybe it's just not notable. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:21, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

According to [5] the logo design dates back to 1965. Steelbeard1 (talk) 18:29, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

That's a great source and I think could be used in the article, if it isn't already. The horse is much clearer in the early versions. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:33, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Post logo new.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Post logo new.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:47, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Hatnote on Blood libel

Personally, I can't see that the hatnote is offensive. But if you or others think so, I have said that I have no objections to alter the language. And as I can't the offensiveness, I really unsure on how to alter the wording to everyones liking. So if you then could rephrase it, it would be very helpful. Steinberger (talk) 11:45, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

It was written in the present tense. Steelbeard1 (talk) 11:49, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Aha. There is contemporary examples of both blood libels against Jews and similar accusations towards others groups, so I figured it was okey. Any suggestions on a better way of putting it? Steinberger (talk) 11:53, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Go to the Blood libel talk page. Steelbeard1 (talk) 11:55, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Vanguardrecords.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Vanguardrecords.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:03, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Article restructuring at the Beatles

There is a discussion taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 04:10, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

There is a straw poll taking place here, your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 02:31, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Woap.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Woap.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:21, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

AIV

Please only report users to WP:AIV if they are currently active. The user you reported today had not edited for around 15 hours prior to your report, so does not require administrator intervention. Thanks, waggers (talk) 12:24, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Steelbeard1. You have new messages at Waggers's talk page.
Message added 12:44, 22 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

waggers (talk) 12:44, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

a.a.p.

Yes, Turner/Time Warner owns the Associated Artists Productions library, but the a.a.p. name is part of MGM because a.a.p. became United Artists Associated and then United Artists Television Distribution. King Shadeed 00:51, March 30, 2012 (UTC)

But when a company is acquired and absorbed into a subsidiary of the acquiring company, the absorbed company becomes defunct. Comprende??? Steelbeard1 (talk) 10:35, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

True. Here's another. If a company sells its library to another company, then the library doesn't count as a company subsidiary. Either way, defunct companies that has been acquired by another and has been folded still counts. While on topic, I think you'd better look at the Filmways and American International articles because they too are defunct but still has the MGM subsidiary category. King Shadeed 11:27, March 30, 2012 (UTC)

By the way, sorry to bring up the topic like that. King Shadeed 11:42, March 30, 2012 (UTC)

AIP and Filmways are also defunct so they are NOT MGM subsidiaries. The absorbing company, Orion Pictures is still technically an MGM subsidiary. I deleted the "MGM subsidiaries" links because that is not the case with AIP and Filmways. Steelbeard1 (talk) 16:06, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

So what do you suggest in the meantime? Use a Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer category? King Shadeed 13:21, March 30, 2012 (UTC)

Only if the unit is still active on paper. Orion Pictures, yes. AIP, Filmways, a.a.p., no. Those three units stopped existing before MGM acquired the libraries. Steelbeard1 (talk) 18:26, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Then I think we'd better do the same thing to The Cannon Group. I was about to suggest using Category:Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer" on them. King Shadeed 17:33, March 30, 2012 (UTC)

Halo Burger

Hi, just got your message. I think it would be best to contact an administrator if you suspect persistent 'bad-editing'. Sorry I can't be of more help, but I'm just a regular anti-vandalism patroller. I was reverting obvious vandalism by an IP editor on the above article, and, in fact, before this I had never heard of 'Halo Burger'!! Regards Denisarona (talk) 13:11, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi friend. You might want to step back from Halo Burger for a few days. No sense edit-warring over trivia. Give it a few days to let it breathe... Carrite (talk) 03:18, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

I talked to the other party just now. But I see that you've reverted him again. Stop reverting edits in article space and start talking out your issues on the talk page. Seriously. Carrite (talk) 16:53, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

I already did and the other parties are agreeing with me if you read the article's talk page.. Steelbeard1 (talk) 17:18, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Just got your latest message. If you still have problems, go to the Edit war/3RR noticeboard, make a report with back-up arguements and an administrator will look at the complaint. Regards Denisarona (talk) 06:44, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Walt disney records logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Walt disney records logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:16, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

The Beatles "Current Members"

No, you're right there was never a "Fab Six", but there have been six past members of a now dissolved group called the Beatles. How can two of the current members be dead? How can a person be a member of a band after they are no longer living? — GabeMc (talk) 22:28, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

But why are two dead people considered "members" versus "past members"? Can a dead person be a member of a band? — GabeMc (talk) 22:35, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Steelbeard1, with all due respect, consensus can change, so the previous discussions on the topic matter little today. — GabeMc (talk) 22:49, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

There is a straw poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 23:56, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

There is a discussion taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 03:47, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Could you please explain to me how the current proposal is misleading or inaccurate, in any way shape or form. — GabeMc (talk) 00:09, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

There is a Straw Poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 00:40, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

There is a third straw poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 02:25, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

• I think I found a good solution to the template issue, take a look at the proposal now, it might satisfy everyone's concerns. — GabeMc (talk) 05:36, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Beatles infobox

I have decided that listing them all under "members" is the best representation of consensus, but I would love your support before moving forward, are there any other outstanding issues we need to work out IYO? — GabeMc (talk) 05:02, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

There is a Straw Poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 05:02, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:GoldenRecordsLogo.png)

Thanks for uploading File:GoldenRecordsLogo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:14, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Halo Burger former Logo

As you know I start Topic Halo Burger. I already meet you in person at Miller Road that where you work there in 2008. Anyway, I notice that new logo Halo Burger on top right. There is any possible for you to add "former Halo Burger logo" inside the text? Thanks CFBancroft (talk) 12:42, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Sgt. Pepper straw poll

Unfortunately, there is a straw poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated.--andreasegde (talk) 11:36, 8 July 2012 (UTC)