User talk:Issueskid

Image tagging for Image:Advent 1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Advent 1.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 17:05, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Advent Project

A tag has been placed on Advent Project, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be a biographical account about a person, group of people, or band, but it does not indicate how or why he/she/they is/are notable. If you can indicate why Advent Project is really notable, I advise you to edit the article promptly, and also put a note on Talk:Advent Project. Any admin should check for such edits before deleting the article. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 7 under Articles. You might also want to read our general biography criteria. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that admins should wait a while for you to assert his/her/their notability, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and then immediately add such an assertion. It is also a very good idea to add citations from reliable sources to ensure that your article will be verifiable.

Please review the Wikipedia guidelines for Notibility of bands and musicians. Are there CD's released by notable labels, national concert tours, reviews from major publications? -- Fan-1967 17:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article has been deleted, please see the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Advent Project --- Deville (Talk) 04:49, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Korn edit

You shouldnt be reverting my edit on the Korn page. There are no references to suggest that Fred Durst is influenced by Korn. Although i'm a fan of both and i know this to be true, it's not fair to just state something on the page without a source which says that Fred is influenced by Korn! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Issueskid (talk • contribs) 23:53, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Naturally, but you shouldn't just put a sentence saying "This sentence needs an inline citation." in the middle of the article. I fixed it now. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 08:25, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits to Surround Sound

Many of your recent edits to Surround Sound seem unsubstantiated and I intend to revert unless you can offer some better justification. In particular:

LFE is not also known as "enhancement."

Actually LFE is also known as Low Frequency Enhancement and you'll now find a reference on that section.

"3-0 Stereo" is nonstandard notation, and is very confusing. You do not define the notaiton.
ITU-R BS.775 is not a standard that is generally used in the Cinema industry. It appears to make some attempt to standardize these things, but I don't think it is the governing standard of record. I don't believe most 5.1 speaker layouts conform to it, nor is it apparent that they should. It is a specification that one may choose to follow, or not. The de facto standard followed theatrically are the Dolby and THX guidelines.
Do you have a copy of ITU-R BS.775?

Feel free to move this to Talk:Surround sound. jhawkinson (talk) 16:36, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm well aware of who Holman is, thanks. Please refrain from "ad hominem" attacks (don't accuse people of not knowing things when there's no way you can know). I don't have his book in front of me, but merely because he expands LFE differently from the industry standard in his book does not mean that that variant expansion is sufficiently notable to merit appearing in this Wikipedia article. Such a non-standard variant (even if used by one of the luminaries of the field) might work better in Low-frequency effect (though even there I'd be skeptical), but I don't think it is appropriate here, where it distracts from the clarity of article and does not assist the reader.

You don't comment on the nonstandard confusing notation issue, so I assume you don't object to my reverting it. I don't claim that music and film use different layouts, though I really know very little about it. That's why I was the person to add "{{fact}}" to it in

14:25, 2 January 2008 Jhawkinson (Talk | contribs) (26,875 bytes)
(Add {{fact}} for claims of seperate music layouts for cinematic theatrical formats. Also some missing periods (.).)

I think we are better off not mentioning the music layout at all unless there is something definitive to say. You've added text claiming it is a "myth," but that appears unsubstantiated. Can you substantiate it?

I should have a copy of ITU-R BS.775 by Wednesday. I do think it likely that SACD and friends have some expected layout that does differ from the cinematic layout, however. Please sign your comments. The words you interspersed above in my original comment confusing to a third-party. jhawkinson (talk) 22:13, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for not being as responsive as I should be, I have been out of time and will continue to be into early next week. I do have a copy of BS.775, and my librarian points out to me that it is only a Recommendation not a Standard. I need to check up on that. We should move much of this discussion to Talk:Surround sound; it's my fault for bringing it up here, I will edit our comments into that page when I have some time.

Please see ad hominem for a discussion of these issues. I asserted a fact (that you had added) was incorrect; maybe I'm wrong, maybe I am not. But you asserted that I did not know something, a statement about me, not about the fact. There is a difference, and it matters. (You are free to also argue that I was in the wrong; but such an argument does not justify your action.) jhawkinson (talk) 05:27, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Try to give me a little time, as you may now see i spotted the link problem before you told me about it. I hadn't finished fully editing and i missed it the first time around.--Issueskid (talk) 19:04, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps you could make use of the Preview feature and try to get your edits correct on the first try. While you're at it:

 Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thank you.

Seriously. Edit summaries are valuable tools and when you are making a lot of edits to a page, they are essential so other editors can follow your work. Please take the time to use them. jhawkinson (talk) 19:14, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah ok, point taken. I've not done much editing on Wiki and i'm still finding my way around it.--Issueskid (talk) 19:19, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Flint (band)

Please read Wikipedia:Naming conventions. Despite the song "mOBSCENE" being written like on the CD and trademarked like that, naming conventions prohibit the the use of all caps writing for the name of articles. There is even a section you should read specifically on the page called Wikipedia:NAMING#Use standard English for titles even if trademarks encourage otherwise. mOBSCENE is not standard English, that is why the article was renamed Mobscene. Likewise, the naming conventions for article names apply for all the links on other pages, like Flint (band). Reverting past this will result in me issuing warnings. — Κaiba 18:17, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Coventry Blaze roster

Template:Coventry Blaze roster has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:54, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:List of GamesMaster episodes

Hello, Issueskid. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:List of GamesMaster episodes, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 12:02, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: List of GamesMaster episodes (March 14)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Zxcvbnm was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

No references are shown in the article.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:List of GamesMaster episodes and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:03, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Considering this is mostly rearranged from the main GamesMaster wiki page (which has no references for any of these details) I don't see how breaking this out to a separate, easier to read page can be rejected. Why did this original information get approved on the main GamesMaster page if it had no references? Issueskid (talk) 16:32, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]