Revision as of 20:46, 24 June 2008 editCOMPFUNK2 (talk | contribs)17,960 editsm comment← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:35, 25 June 2008 edit undoCOMPFUNK2 (talk | contribs)17,960 editsm commentNext edit → | ||
Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
:::::I know you're new, but two editors have already explained what the problem with your reasoning is, and why the statement still amounts to weasel words. Either you don't get it or you just don't care. In any case, if you continue to behave this way, I'll have no choice but to turn to an administrator. ] (]) 06:36, 22 June 2008 (UTC) | :::::I know you're new, but two editors have already explained what the problem with your reasoning is, and why the statement still amounts to weasel words. Either you don't get it or you just don't care. In any case, if you continue to behave this way, I'll have no choice but to turn to an administrator. ] (]) 06:36, 22 June 2008 (UTC) | ||
::::::Okay, that's it. You just changed it again. I'm talking to an administrator. ] (]) 20:46, 24 June 2008 (UTC) | ::::::Okay, that's it. You just changed it again. I'm talking to an administrator. ] (]) 20:46, 24 June 2008 (UTC) | ||
*Let me see if I can spell this out for you, Stan. Simply listing publications that ''may'' agree with the questioned statement isn't enough. You must actually ''cite'' ] in order to back up your claim. If you don't know how to do this, either look ] or ask someone else for help. But as it stands now, the statement on its own qualifies as weasel words because there are no sources to back it up. And just so you know, admins already know about the situation, so unless you or someone else add reliable sources to back up the statement, I suggest you stop removing the tag. ] (]) 03:35, 25 June 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 03:35, 25 June 2008
Albums B‑class | |||||||
|
Sea Change is hardly indie, as it was released on a major label. I'm changing the tag to "folk rock."
Maybe this is news to you, but indie does not equal folk. This album is hardly folk rock, it is fairly electronic. I'm changing the tag to "alternative rock."Tintagel555 (talk) 23:42, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:BeckSeaCh.jpg
Image:BeckSeaCh.jpg is being used on this article. 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 Misplaced Pages 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.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and 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.BetacommandBot 02:15, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Sea Change 04.jpg
Image:Sea Change 04.jpg is being used on this article. 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 this Misplaced Pages article 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.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and 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.BetacommandBot 04:28, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Sea Change 03.jpg
Image:Sea Change 03.jpg is being used on this article. 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 this Misplaced Pages article 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.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and 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.BetacommandBot 04:28, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Sea Change 02.jpg
Image:Sea Change 02.jpg is being used on this article. 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 this Misplaced Pages article 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.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and 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.BetacommandBot 04:28, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Weasel words
- Stan Simmons keeps removing the {{ww}} tag from the end of the intro to the article, but he isn't actually removing, re-wording, or providing sources for the statement. I realize he's a new editor, so I guess I can let that slide, but the reason why I didn't reinstate the tag is because I don't want to be accused of starting an edit war.
- Thoughts? Anthony Rupert (talk) 18:24, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
- It's not a "weasel word" when every review of the album concurs with the statement. Stan Simmons (talk) 01:45, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
- It is a weasel word when you don't provide sources. What don't you get? Anthony Rupert (talk) 09:08, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
- The sources are already in the article. Stan Simmons (talk) 06:16, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
- This really isn't that hard to understand. I guess I'll have to go to WP:3. Anthony Rupert (talk) 15:43, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
- I saw this on WP:3, and while this doesn't seem like a terribly active dispute, I'll give my 2 cents. First, I added {{ww}} back in the article, as those are clearly weasle words because the last sentence of the lead states that it is notable and important, but doesn't specify why or give reliable sources to back it up. Juliancolton 15:53, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, but they're not "weasel words" when the majority of the album reviews linked in the article concur with the statement. Stan Simmons (talk) 22:39, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Where are these so-called "links"? Are you purposely missing the point? Anthony Rupert (talk) 06:14, 22 June 2008 (UTC)- I know you're new, but two editors have already explained what the problem with your reasoning is, and why the statement still amounts to weasel words. Either you don't get it or you just don't care. In any case, if you continue to behave this way, I'll have no choice but to turn to an administrator. Anthony Rupert (talk) 06:36, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
- Okay, that's it. You just changed it again. I'm talking to an administrator. Anthony Rupert (talk) 20:46, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, but they're not "weasel words" when the majority of the album reviews linked in the article concur with the statement. Stan Simmons (talk) 22:39, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
- Let me see if I can spell this out for you, Stan. Simply listing publications that may agree with the questioned statement isn't enough. You must actually cite said sources in order to back up your claim. If you don't know how to do this, either look here or ask someone else for help. But as it stands now, the statement on its own qualifies as weasel words because there are no sources to back it up. And just so you know, admins already know about the situation, so unless you or someone else add reliable sources to back up the statement, I suggest you stop removing the tag. Anthony Rupert (talk) 03:35, 25 June 2008 (UTC)