User talk:Michig/Archive15

Dear Sir or Madam, I hope this finds you well. For about three years now I have been deleting a fallasy in my Wikipedia page. I have had various email conversations with many editors.

The page is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Yuill

The incorrect statement is that I remix under the name Hunger/Thirst. This is not true. I have collaborated with a friend under this name, but not on the mentioned remixes, or any other remixes for that matter. I would be very grateful if you could delete the line "sometimes under the pseudonym Hunger/Thirst, also the name used for a collaboration with Charlie Westropp".

I have sent evidence during my last email conversation with Elena Salvatore regarding the remixes in question. Here is that evidence.

Tilly And The Wall - Let The Beat Control You (James Yuill Remix)

source 1 - http://www.discogs.com/Tilly-And-The-Wall-That-Remix-Sucks/release/1815341 source 2 - http://hypem.com/search/tilly%20and%20the%20wall%20(james%20yuill%20remix)/1/

Answering Machine - Lightbulbs (James Yuill Remix)

source 1 - http://www.discogs.com/Answering-Machine-Obviously-Cold/release/1832442 source 2 - http://hypem.com/search/lightbulbs%20(james%20yuill%20remix)/1/

Au Revoir Simone - The Lucky One (James Yuill Remix)

source 1 - http://www.discogs.com/Au-Revoir-Simone-Reverse-Migration/master/258814 source 2 - http://www.myspace.com/music/au-revoir-simone-3497810/songs/the-lucky-one-james-yuill-remix-40234499

On none of these links does it refer to Hunger/Thirst.

Feel free to contact me with your thoughts on the matter. Best wishes James — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesyuill (talk • contribs) 16:38, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for getting in touch about this. We've had sourced content (correct or not) removed without discussion several times, and we had no way of knowing who was actually making the changes, so apologies if the article has included incorrect information. I'll check this out later. Could you clarify what/who Hunger/Thirst actually is? Thanks.--Michig (talk) 17:36, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've altered the article - if there are any remaining issues please let me know. Thanks.--Michig (talk) 15:56, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Michig, Thanks for correcting the information on my page. The page is now perfect. Many thanks James —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesyuill (talk • contribs) 14:07, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for removing the tag on Thomas Dudley Cabot. I left a message on that editor's page, and then got busy. When I came back to remove the tag, you'd beaten me to it. Regards, MarmadukePercy (talk) 21:05, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, on 5 March you deprodded The Charms with the comment that plenty of sources exist. I've just been over to fix a reflist error and have taken the time to look for sources. I can't find anything of note and wonder if you might perhaps have been getting your sources mixed up with Otis Williams and the Charms ? I can't believe that a modern rock band would have to rely on non-web sources for the assertion of notability, and so the group appears to fail WP:GNG, let alone WP:MUSIC, unless I've completely screwed up my search. Have I missed something blindingly obvious here? - Sitush (talk) 12:39, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well there's these for example: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11].--Michig (talk) 15:52, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Geez! Why couldn't I find those? I've never been too happy about relying on Allmusic but the news stuff is there to support it. Haven't got a clue what was wrong with my search terms, but thanks very much & sorry to have wasted your time. - Sitush (talk) 16:12, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

		The Music Barnstar
		for your continued hard work in creating reggae-related artist pages on Wikipedia. Keep up the great work! Chimino (talk) 12:05, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou. --Michig (talk) 12:32, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Michig. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 May 1.
Message added 13:20, 1 May 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Per above #The Thin Kids - any progress? Cheers,  Chzz  ►  11:22, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think it may be best as a section in the Everett True article. There are other notable/borderline-notable people in the band but it seems to be mainly True's baby. There isn't really enough for a standalone article. --Michig (talk) 21:45, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Michig. You have new messages at Kudpung's talk page.
Message added 03:10, 12 May 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Hello, Michig. You have new messages at Template talk:UK Indie Chart albums.
Message added 19:21, 15 May 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

- for catching the vandalism on my tp. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:46, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem.--Michig (talk) 08:47, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Michig,

I write to you with full knowledge that you are an experienced user of Wikipedia with a good sense of the rules regarding an article. Regardless of our dispute over my biography page, I have chosen to ask you to help me.

My career has been extremely challenging to resurrect professionally (although not without some success) since 2004, and my recovery of drug addiction. I have no desire to negate my past, only to give the best possible chances for my future. Professionally. I am aware that it is not advised in the talk page guidelines to display personal feelings, but so far, this situation has been a great upset to me. What do you advise I do? I am very proud of many of the professional achievements that have been included on my wikipedia page, but am not too naive to realise that professional relationships with new potential colleagues may be effected by the inclusion of the correctly verified drug addiction I suffered and was cured from 8 years ago in Thailand. As someone else mentioned on the talk page that it should be debated as to whether or not I am indeed 'notable' enough to even have an article. I would be more in favour of deleting the whole article. Colleagues, friends and family have all assured me that contrary to the attack I feel I am under, you are just doing your job and mean no personal upset to me, so I am asking you for your help in this matter.

I have attempted to find out how I can privately message you but to no avail, so I have no other option but to discuss this publicly. I hope we may still be able to communicate in private, please email me through my website if this is agreeable to you.

From what I have read, there is also doubt about the veracity of my identity under this username. I am not as knowledgable as you are about Wikipedia so please tell me what I can do to prove that this is actually Tim Arnold. I have no manager, no publicist, no record label. I represent myself and would be delighted to hear from you and hearing what you advise I do. Username Sohohobo was me and I forgot the password. Thetimarnold is also me. The person who created the page is a fan of Jocasta from Belgium.

I look forward to hearing from you

Best regards,

Tim Arnold ```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thetimarnold (talk • contribs) 00:48, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused about what your issue is here. While apparently wanting information removed from one page, you appear to have added that same information to another ([12]). I have no interest here other than having a factual, balance article. If you believe that there are factual errors in the article and that you are the subject you can make a request to Wikipedia - see Wikipedia:Contact us/Article problem/Factual error (from subject) - this allows you to contact Wikipedia in privacy. Thanks. --Michig (talk) 06:00, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't "Supergrass were" improper grammar? I was taught that subject verb agreement for a singular subject-noun (like Supergrass, in this case) requires a singular verb--which would be "was" in this case. The British don't use the same subject-verb rules as Americans do?!Jpcohen (talk) 11:30, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See British and American English differences#Formal and notional agreement.--Michig (talk) 15:11, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your helpful edits at Codeine (band) - I've been slowly trying to improve Codeine-related articles for a while now so your help is appreciated! Cheers, Amkilpatrick (talk) 14:03, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. If there are any other articles in this area that you want me to take a look at please let me know.--Michig (talk) 16:09, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Michig,

I notice you undid my change to John Oliver (speedway rider), suggesting in the edit comment that it was "unnecessary". Could you explain further why you feel this is unnecessary? Such links back top disambiguation pages see,s to be standard practice on Wikipedia and is encouraged at Wikipedia:Disambig. It seems useful for readers who might end up on the wrong John Oliver page, say via a search engine. It doesn't detract from the page, so I'm not sure why you feel it shouldn't be included. Thanks, Palltrast (talk) 14:09, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Hatnote#Disambiguating article names that are not ambiguous. Thanks.--Michig (talk) 14:21, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	I've noticed your continuing work on UBLPs, so just wanted to say thanks and keep up the good work. Feel free to come over to WP:URBLPR if you want to help us out with the last few months. The-Pope (talk) 15:49, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I've been trying to wipe out April 2011 this week - after that I may join you in working on your URBLPR months.--Michig (talk) 15:59, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Consider this an oak leaf cluster on that barnstar, I'd been wondering who'd been working 4/11 and finally got around to looking this morning. Bravo! --joe decker^{talk to me} 14:23, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again - all 4/11 ones now either sourced, redirected, prodded or AFD'd. Phew. Now I need a rest.--Michig (talk) 16:37, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the URBLPR team! I'm afraid we aren't sophisticated enough to have a bot automatically welcome new members, so you will have to settle for this mundane hand-typed welcome message. Glad to have you officially aboard! -- Whpq (talk) 17:57, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Michig, it's not my POV. Both his parents are Irish and that's what he identifies as - as the ref I added (and you cut with no explanation) states. Haldraper (talk) 16:45, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The ref says that he supports the Irish team. This has no bearing on his nationality, which is British. Many British people have parents born in another country and this is already covered in the article.--Michig (talk) 16:49, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am still curious as to your deprodding of the article Zoroaster (band). You wrote deprod - enough coverage to indicate notability, but it does not meet any criteria from WP:BAND, as far as I know. Have I missed a criterion that it meets? Please place a {{tb}} on my talk page, or reply on my talk page, as I do not have your talk page on my watch list. warrior4321 16:53, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See criterion 1 of WP:BAND. The band has been the subject of significant coverage (bio and reviews at Allmusic, others inc [13], [14]).--Michig (talk) 16:55, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I did not see that you added more references as well, I assumed that you merely deprodded it. Thanks for the heads up. warrior4321 17:07, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Still not convinced on notability. No sources found AT ALL besides the trivial mention you dug up. Lack of sources trumps any criterion of WP:BAND. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 22:04, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think a record review in WIRE qualifies as a 'trivial mention', the problem is that the full article isn't available online so we can't cite it. I agree that the article needs some reliable sourcing if it's going to stay.--Michig (talk) 08:18, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Michig Thank you for your support against the proposed deletion of this article. It does seem that Alan Liefting has gone ahead now and proposed that it goes for speedy deletion of the article, despite your comment,... and while I was updating, expanding and verifying the article too. On which page do I put in my bid to retain the article, and what else can I do to ensure it doesn't get kicked off? Thanks Islahaddow (talk) 10:47, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As you have removed the PROD tag it isn't currently heading for deletion. The best way to avoid it being deleted is to make sure that the article is clear about why Brett Bailey is notable and that any claims in the article are supported by reliable independent sources (newspapers & books would be good). Thanks.--Michig (talk) 16:37, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see it all the time. Someone spams the AFD with sources, everyone agrees to keep because of said sources, yet nobody adds an iota to the article. 4 years later, the article's still a three sentence stub with barely an assertation of notability because NOBODY could be arsed. It's always somebody else's problem; everyone thinks everyone else will do it, and as a result, things just go around in circles and nobody does anything. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 14:13, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Also, I emphasized the "may be" in WP:BAND because far too many people are interpreting it as "will unambiguously be". It's possible to meet WP:BAND but fail WP:GNG. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 14:19, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see this all that often, and when I find sources I usually add them at the latest shortly after the AFD has closed - I'm often of the view that I'm not going to waste my time adding sources to an article if there's a chance that the article could get deleted and hence that time would be wasted. I have forgotten on occasion and come back to add them a few months later. Sometimes another editor has taken the sources and added them. Given the history of this project, i.e. several years when articles with no sources whatsoever were tolerated as the norm (much like some of the other language Wikipedias seem to be now), there is inevitably going to be a large number of articles that have issues that need addressing. They can't all be fixed overnight, and most can be turned into decent articles. I would recommend that if a subject appears notable but the article lacks sources then you tag it appropriately and raise it with an appropriate WikiProject - contrary to what a lot of noisy individuals have shouted regularly, as can be seen from the unreferenced BLP project the backlogs are now being dealt with so maintenance tags are not pointless. You complain about others passing the buck, but if you take articles to AFD and then shout at other people to add sources, who's passing the buck to who there? Creating half-decent articles with proper sources is everybody's problem, improving articles that need improving is everybody's problem - too often people nominate articles at AFD then expect everyone else to do all the work.--Michig (talk) 16:32, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since it's related to my discussion at Wikipedia talk:Notability (music), you might wanna weigh in at this AFD. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 03:26, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Wow. I've seen boxes of Eggo that didn't waffle that much. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 18:29, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm sorry - should I have just said 'delete - not notable' like so many people do? What's Eggo anyway?--Michig (talk) 21:38, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • The waffle brand. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 22:22, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Michig! In relation to this edit, I have just started a new discussion thread to drum up more information about oversized landscape images in MA-infoboxes, and figured I should extend you an invitation to take part, if you please. I don't have a problem with your edit, I just need to know how to deal with these ugly oversized images correctly, if and/or when they're encountered. Thank you :)  -- WikHead (talk) 09:20, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Michig, I find these warnings from you a bit of a joke given it is you who are POV-pushing on the Gallagher pages. There is no dispute about their British (and Irish) nationality. It is their ethnicity that is the point. How anyone who has two Irish parents is English is beyond me. By your reckoning, Cliff Richard is Indian not English. Haldraper (talk) 15:07, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't dispute their nationality, stop trying to change it. We don't put ethnicity in the lede, so stop changing it. There's a discussion about this on the Talk:Noel Gallagher and that is where consensus will be reached if anywhere. If you continue to edit-war over this rather than attempting to work towards a consensus you will be blocked. Cliff Richard was born to English parents who were living in India at the time, and was raised in England from the age of eight. I dare say that he could get an Indian passport if he wished but that doesn't make him Indian and not English.--Michig (talk) 15:20, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The point you miss completely is that there is no such nationality as English. English is an ethnicity based on your parents, there is no such thing as an "English passport". You can have British and Irish nationality. The Gallaghers acquired the former at birth and are entitled to the latter as both their parents are Irish citizens (in fact, you only need one Irish grandparent to claim Irish citizenship). If you're saying we can only put nationality in the lead, then the Gallaghers' is British. Haldraper (talk) 08:55, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you're saying they're British, why did you change this to Irish so many times? Why don't you contribute to the discussion that I pointed you to?--Michig (talk) 08:58, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Since I couldn't find sources for this article either, I just sent it to AfD. Regards, Comte0 (talk) 18:10, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why on earth didn't you just let the prod run its course? Now we have to have to waste time on an AFD.--Michig (talk) 18:22, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You PRODded this, and it was deleted. Undeletion has been requested at WP:REFUND, so per WP:DEL#Proposed deletion I have restored it, and now notify you in case you wish to consider taking it to AfD. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:45, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Michig, I have added references for "The Poetess". Please let me know if there is anything else required to be "undeleted". Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ogpoetess (talk • contribs) 02:21, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Got it, regarding the signature. thank you.Ogpoetess (talk) 02:58, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Michig

You have achieved the deletion of a page. If I have new arguments against your decision, may I discuss that with you, or should I proceed in an other way?

thanks --Amintib (talk) 16:21, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know which article this concerns, and what reason you have for believing it should be undeleted and I'll take a look. Thanks.--Michig (talk) 16:30, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dave Freeman (meteorologist) Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 19:24, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel this article does not meet the criteria, by all means delete it. Noles1984 (talk) 13:59, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Johnny Ringo (Visual Artist) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johnny Ringo (Visual Artist) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Lagrange613 (talk) 02:27, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Lachlanusername (talk) 20:09, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. And thanks for the tidying up after my Grandaddy edits.--Michig (talk) 20:12, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies for not looking more closely at the article's history. Thank you for restoring the article and reverting to a "good" version of the page. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 21:46, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You PRODded this, and it was deleted. Undeletion has been requested at WP:REFUND, so I have restored it and now notify you in case you want to consider taking it to AfD. The requester is a new user who says that references are available; I will explain notability to him. JohnCD (talk) 20:43, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

George best77 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) went right back to vandalising Ian Brown after the expiration of his block. Yworo (talk) 21:11, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there

I am Ian Brown's assistant. I have worked with him since he signed his solo deal with Polydor. He has been trying to amend his own Wikipedia page but it has been reverted back each time he amends it and he has now been blocked. I have re-amended the page to match his revisions.

Please can you unblock him from editing the page as any updates from either he or myself are accurate and at Ian's request.

If you need some validation to prove he is actually Ian Brown please let me know and I can arrange something either through the label or via his website.

Many thanks natalie (----) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Natniss (talk • contribs) 19:12, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• (talk page stalker) While I can't speak for Michig, Natalie, I urge you to stay away from the article lest a big fat COI template (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest) be placed on the article. On a sidenote, information in the article needs to be based on reliable sources and it needs to be encyclopedic; I have made some changes based on that requirement. Thank you--and Michig, feel free to disagree with me. Drmies (talk) 19:20, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I agree with Drmies here. The article certainly needs to be improved but some of the changes made were not improvements. There's plenty of coverage of Ian Brown around, so citing sources for anything that needs adding shouldn't be too difficult. The George best77 account isn't currently blocked by the way. If you see anything the needs adding, changing, or removing, it might be best if you raise it at Talk:Ian Brown - I'll keep an eye on it and make any changes that I can as long as I can find independent sources to back them up. Thanks. --Michig (talk) 19:40, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Hmm. Looks like we may have a problem here.--Michig (talk) 20:13, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeremy Robinson. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 16:00, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ANI?--Michig (talk) 21:03, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, no--I guess that's some autofill function in that edit bar. Good call, sorry! Drmies (talk) 02:59, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]