User talk:Eyrian/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Fair use rationale for Image:A_Dark_and_Hungry_God_Arises_Cover.png

Thanks for uploading Image:A_Dark_and_Hungry_God_Arises_Cover.png. 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.

Please go to the image 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 '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 fair use images 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. ↔NMajdan•talk 14:38, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Salmon and Archiving

OK dude. 2 things. 1 im sr i screwed the salmon discusion pg up i wuz REALLY ticked. 2 u could do to delete some of the 31kb on this page...

thanks now,

Blu Pickles 19:23, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Orichalcum

Man, kudos to you for cleaning up that article. It's bothered me for a while, but I could never really formulate a plan of attack. Thanks for cutting the gordian knot and just deleting all that crap. Ford MF 19:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! --Eyrian 19:25, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

May I know what the reason you remove my article? I have already put the word "fiction" in the title. Or Ford MF is anti Manga? Wow168 05:19, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I removed the entry you added because it shares nothing with the subject of the article but the name. Further, references to Orichalcum in fiction are numerous, and rarely extend beyond bare-mention of an exotic metal. It is neither feasible nor useful to attempt to try and list all of these occurrences. --Eyrian 05:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, what should I do if I wanted to publish my contribution? Create another with the title "Orichalcum (Spriggan)"? Please advise. d@@b 05:42, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I would suggest adding a mention of the metal, noting that it is based off Orichalcum, to the Spriggan (manga) article. --Eyrian 05:46, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Alpaca edit

Hello. Why did you remove the Citation needed tags? They were in reference to facts that need a citation? --BlindEagle^{talk~contribs} 20:37, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

My bad. I did not read the edit close enough. Everything appears to be fine. --BlindEagle^{talk~contribs} 20:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism Reverting

Randall is an amoeba though!!!!

You reverted Costco right out from under me!!!!Sentineneve 18:39, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey, any suggestions on how I can revert/remove vandalism faster/better? It seems I have to click history, go back through the history on a blank, then click the proper article, cut and paste the entire thing into the current article. It takes forever for how long it takes them to blank a page. Sentineneve 18:47, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I tend to do things the old-fashioned way. I open all the diffs for my watchlist, and check if any of them are vandalism. If they are, I look at the previous revision to check if it also looks suspicious (by the same IP, redlinked username). If it is suspicious, I look at the cumulative diff (using the history page) to see what's changed. In any case, once I've tracked down any vandalism, I click the "edit" button next to the unvandalized revision time on the diff page, and then save the page over the vandalized version.

There are, however, special tools that are supposed to make this easier. Check out Twinkle and VandalProof. --Eyrian 19:10, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:DeVision.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:DeVision.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. J Milburn 23:13, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Plated mail

If you dleted link to ru:Бехтерец, could you make an article from this text?

plated mail, plated chainmail, splinted mail, splinted chainmail — a chianmail with embeded plates, known in Middle East, Moors, Central Asia, India and Russia. Japanese version of this armour is known as tatami-do.

In Russia are known three kinds of this armour, all of them were adopted throw Perisa, initially as persian export, so they have persian names:

• Russian: Бехтерец (Behterets) - from small horizontal plates enttitled to vertical rows without gaps, joined by rings, and embeded to chainmail
• Russian: Калантарь (Kalantar) - from long horizantal plates embeded to chainmail and resemblim lamina ramour construction
• Russian: Юшман (Yushman) - from square plates embeded to chainmail, very similar to tatami-do. The differnce with tatami-do is that tatami-do was made for no so reach warriors, and so usually have inferrior quality, however Yushman was made for reach, and have good quality.

Alas I know very little on this subject outside of the sources mentioned in the article. There were a few recent threads on the subject on myArmoury and Swordforum and so searching there should bring more answers. Middle Eastern arms and armour fall outside my area of main interest. Mercutio.Wilder 17:23, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Links

• Photos of Turkey Armour
• [http://www.xenophon-mil.org/rushistory/medievalarmor/parti.htm RUSSIAN

MEDIEVAL ARMS AND ARMOR]

• Armour and Warriors of the Silk Road

PS name splinted chainmail is from Medieval II: Total War game, which instead trasliatarion made deecsription oif this armour (for Moors, Egypt, and Turkey)
http://ru.wiki.x.io/wiki/Изображение:Turkish_P1015064.jpg ( http://ru.wiki.x.io/wiki/Image:Turkish_P1015064.jpg ) a sample of a Turkish armour
http://ru.wiki.x.io/wiki/Изображение:Bechter_1.gif ( http://ru.wiki.x.io/wiki/Image:Bechter_1.gif ) a counstruction of Behterets
http://rubens.anu.edu.au/raid1/cdroms/webready/england/leeds/museums/royal_armories/arms_and_armour/turkey/ nice phtos from Turkey

I've created the article at plated mail. Please add references, at least on the talk page so someone else can help. --Eyrian 03:35, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

• GREATEST THANKS! :-)

Inlays and onlays

How does this require a clean-up tag? DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 20:02, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

I suppose it doesn't. I think the structure could be a bit better, but not enough to really merit the tag. --Eyrian 20:19, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Sysop Nom

• Looks like, if all goes well for the next 5 or so hours, you're going to be an administrator! Let me be the first to say CONGRATS! The pressure was on, and you have handled it very well (nice question answers). If I ever need help from an admin, you'll be the first that I turn to. Good luck! - HammerHeadHuman ^(talk)(work) 18:11, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism apology

hey, eyrian: i'm the guy from the dome of the rock. i was wrong. you were right. sorry i let my anger control me.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.87.130.64 (talk • contribs).

Apology accepted, I'm glad you understand the importance of what we're doing here. I look forward to your contributions in the future. --Eyrian 01:48, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:TBMPromo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TBMPromo.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. J Milburn 10:52, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations

You're now an admin, with all that entails. Have fun using the new tools to help the project and as you get comfortable with them help clear out the many backlogs. Feel free to ask if you're unsure about anything and spend some time on the admin reading list to make sure you're following policies. Again though, congrats. - Taxman ^Talk 00:20, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations. Here are what pass for words of wisdom from the puppy:

Remember you will always protect the wrong version. Remember you must always follow the rules, except for when you ignore them. You will always pick the wrong one to do. (See #5) Remember to assume good faith and not bite. Remember that when you are applying these principles most diligently, you are probably dealing with a troll. Use the block ability sparingly. Enjoy the insults you receive when you do block. Remember when you make these errors, someone will be more than happy to point them out to you in dazzling clarity and descriptive terminology. and finally, Remember to contact me if you ever need assistance, and I will do what I am able. KillerChihuahua?!?

DISCLAIMER: This humor does not reflect the official humor of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, or Jimbo Wales. All rights released under GFDL.

complaint

why this user deleted my article??? it was a translation of another VALID article of our coorporation. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Emontalban (talk • contribs).

Because it was not in English. This is the English Wikipedia, and all articles on it need to be in English. Please consider the Spanish language Wikipedia for your contributions. --Eyrian 11:02, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Deleted "US Kings"?

Why'd you delete the article I made? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by LJRO (talk • contribs) 21:21, 11 May 2007 (UTC).

Because articles on Wikipedia must have notability. Please read that page to understand the requirements for inclusion in Wikipedia. --Eyrian 22:11, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Signature removal??

Why did you remove my signature on Memento Mori article? It took a long time to write that. I'm surely putting it back unless you can provide a valid answer... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Megaswimmer (talk • contribs) 20:53, 12 May 2007 (UTC). Megaswimmer 20:54, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Signatures do not belong in articles. It's great that you're contributing, but nobody owns articles. --Eyrian 20:55, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

The Reserve

why did you just delete "the reserve" article? --Jedifromhell 20:32, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Because they do not satisfy the Wikipedia requirements for notability. --Eyrian 20:49, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

why not?Jedifromhell 10:15, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Allow me to clarify, the article did not assert notability. That is to say, no mention was made of them doing anything that would qualify as notable under the Wikipedia policy for musical notability. --Eyrian 15:42, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Wasabi vandalism

The unsourced material that 62.189.96.213 keeps adding is absolute nonsense, so don’t hold your breathe for any citations. I’ve seen this before and think this person gets a kick out of baiting whoever deletes his material by repeatedly undeleting it till the deleter goes away in frustration. Rather than give him his kicks, leave it there for a few hours. In the meantime, he’ll get bored and stop watching the page. Best regards, Jim_Lockhart 14:23, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

If that's the case, he'll be blocked. Thanks for the heads-up. --Eyrian 15:01, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Deletions

What must i change in my article for you to not delete it? I am new at this and don't fully understand the reasoning for your deletions.

thanks, 24.179.195.94 03:59, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Could you please be more specific about the article in question? --Eyrian 04:00, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Sunshine Behavior

What exactly must I change in my article on Sunshine Behavior for you to not delete it? I am new at this and I don't fully understand your reason for deletion.

thanks, Mitch paradeis 04:03, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

It's not a matter of presenyation, it's a matter of content. Please read WP:MUSIC for what is necessary for inclusion. --Eyrian 04:04, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm still confused, does the article lack significance or notability? Mitch paradeis 04:11, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes. The article does not assert notability according to the requirements laid out in the linked guideline. Please note that notability is a term of art around here, and means something rather specific. --Eyrian 04:46, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

my best argument as far as notability would be Sunshine Behaviors involvement in the Bodog Battle of the Bands. They did not win, however, they will appear on the bodog battle of the bands television series later this year on a major television network. If i were able to provide you with a source for this information would my article then meet the criteria? Also I can find sources to assret that they have played for a televised proffesional sporting event, though i do not know if that would help meet the criteria...

thanks again, Mitch paradeis 04:55, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Unless their participation in the battle of the bands was the principal subject of an article in a reliable source, that would not count. Appearing on TV might merit inclusion under WP:MUSIC point 12, but only after broadcast, and only if they themselves were the subject, which seems improbable (based on their not winning). A single performance does not seem to satisfy notability. I'm sorry, but they may simply not be suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. --Eyrian 05:00, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

under the first point it mentioned non trivial publications... would articles published by Bodog Music in wich they were the subject of be considered under that? Mitch paradeis 05:07, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

That would depend on the scale of the coverage. If it's just an entry in a list, then no. If it is an article largely about them then quite possibly. Care to link me? --Eyrian 05:11, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately I am just finding out now that the articles are no longer on bodog's site. perhaps i will have to remain patient with my article, Sunshine Behavior has a huge following in Minneapolis and is beginning to gather attension from people in high places... it won't be too long till i can find something to meet wikipedias criteria.

thanks again for all your time. i appreciate it. Mitch paradeis 05:36, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

'twas now bridge

tsk tsk, you already tried once! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 131.104.152.138 (talk • contribs).

HOMOPHOBIC ABUSE OF YOUR ADMIN PRIVS

Can you give a reason why you deemed the article Queer Justice League worthy of speedy deletion because it wasn't notable? Despite the fact that it's the next generation of ACT UP, gets hundreds of people at its meetings, thousands at its actions, and MSM press coverage including the New York Times? Perhaps you have a personal axe to grind. Please defend the capricious, potentially homophobic abuse of your admin privileges. Aroundthewayboy 19:10, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Also, you completely flouted the approach you articulated below during your candidacy for Admin. To me, that is grounds for reversing your admin privileges because of your gross abuse (considering that in the original article I mentioned the many ways in which the group was remarkable, had garnered media attention, achieved significant accomplishments, etc.).

and in particular, who do you feel about speedy deleting pages that seem to you unhelpful, but that don't fit any of the speedy delete criteria closely? DES (talk) 00:01, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Process is important because I couldn't write this encyclopedia by myself, and process is designed to let everyone get a chance to have their say. I am strongly inclined to not let something be speedy deleted unless it fits one of the categories neatly. In those cases, proposed and debated deletions serve to give other editors a chance to put their expertise into play to determine if the subject is important. I've certainly written articles that didn't (initially) assert notability, though they could meet the criteria with verifiable information. Further, by giving people a chance except in the most obvious cases of bad pages, we are more likely to attract and keep newcomers, rather than frustrate them. --Eyrian 01:13, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[/i]

Aroundthewayboy 19:19, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

The article as written did not assert notability. If they have garnered media attention, list it in the article. Nothing was listed there but the fact that a few people members of the organization got arrested as part of an incident that got media attention. That's not asserting importance. Their recognition may only be incidental. If referenced, it would've been fine. However, as written, it most certainly was within CSD A7.

Your accusations of homophobia are uncalled for; please read WP:NPA for Wikipedia's policy on personal attacks. If you wish, you may examine my deletion log and come to your own conclusions. Further, note that your attempts at retribution are uncalled for. Please stay cool. I'm always willing to discuss people who have issues with deletion, as other comments on this page indicate. --Eyrian 22:27, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

The entry most certainly did not as written fall within CSD A7, which I double checked to make sure. It referred to the media coverage, and the only reason I didn't put a link to the NYT coverage is that you need to use Times Select to access their archives.

I did look at your deletion log before I wrote this. Which is where I got the idea that you were homophobically abusing your power.

I'm not getting into a flame war with some homophobe who doesn't deserve his admin privileges. However, let the record state that you were completely out of order in this case, and I am guessing other cases where people didn't stick up for themselves. Aroundthewayboy 03:57, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Which of my deletions gave you this idea? --Eyrian 03:32, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Just to be clear, in the original article that this admin capriciously deleted, I did indeed assert notability by referring to various accomplishments and media coverage of the group whose entry I created. At the very least the entry should have been flagged instead of speedily deleted. If that had happened, I would have added links to more than just the group's web site (which, by the way, includes pages with the media coverage). And I wouldn't have had to point out the gross abuse of power by Eyrian.

At this point I'm only clarifying what happened for posterity. Aroundthewayboy 04:03, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Apoptygma Berzerk - You and Me Against the World.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Apoptygma Berzerk - You and Me Against the World.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.

Please go to the image 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 '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 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 19:52, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Music of Turkey (usage of Map)

Thanks for your input. Can you extend your opinion why that map isn't helpful? It shows the differing provinces of Turkey and indicates the wide range of folk styles that brings up. Instead of just deleting, it would be far more helpful to then actually suggest what type of map would be more useful in your opinion. Thanks again. Deff6 22:05, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure if any map would be particularly helpful. That one is (I feel) much too large, to start. Further, the article doesn't make a lot of mention about geographic reference, so a map isn't particularly helpful to comprehension. I didn't see it as just deleting, just trying to keep things on topic. --Eyrian 22:12, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

• The map being large I agree, however I don't understand how after reading the article on the music of Turkey you express that there isn't a lot about georgraphical reference. Turkish music is a direct creation of its geographical setting, it wouldn't be so diverse if it wasn't for the convergence of many peoples throughout the centuries. Each region of Turkey now has its own folk style. I think a map helps to give setting, myself. Deff6 13:01, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

While that's certainly important, a map of present-day Turkish provinces doesn't really convey that notion. Perhaps a map that showed different historical divisions that contributed to the modern diversity? --Eyrian 17:51, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Great, if you find one let me know. Deff6 19:03, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you, that cross-stitched Barnstar is too wonderful!! - PKM 00:40, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad you like it! I noticed your excellent contributions, and I really thought you deserved the appreciation. --Eyrian 04:04, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Capitalization

Every other time someone comes trying to "correct" the capitalization. However, this has been discussed thousands of times, and consensus indicates we should follow "English" rules of capitalization, regardless of trademark desires, check the threads at WikiProject Songs, J-pop article, Manual of Style for Japan-related articles, WikiProject Japan, etc. If you do really want to begin "correcting" capitalization again, I suggest to contact WikiProject Japan to request changing the guidelines. -- ReyBrujo 18:29, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, I don't really have that much invested in this. It seems to be incorrect to me (as Wikipedia should be an authoritative source), but I'm not willing to fight about something so trivial. --Eyrian 19:08, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Verifying the Flying robot of Chalmers

If you just check google, you'll find many articles, scientific, popular, and news articles that make reference to the ornithopter built at Chalmers. http://www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLJ,GGLJ:2006-51,GGLJ:en&q=nordin+flying

Also, the first link in External links provides a detailed explanation, pictures, and analysis.

I've just started a Wikipedia entry for the scientist, Peter Nordin, after doing an article following his recent presentation at RoboBusiness 2007 Conference. http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/05/16/robobusiness-robots-with-imagination/

For other information about his work in robotics, see The Humanoid Project: http://humanoid.fy.chalmers.se/

More information on Peter’s research can be found at http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=peter%2Bnordin%2Brobot&btnG=Google+Search —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rogerfgay (talk • contribs).

That's fine, but please remember that the burden of proof lies with the person adding content. If you want to add a referenced section, feel free to. --Eyrian 20:19, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I admit that I'm new to editing Wikipedia pages. The rule as I understand it is verifiability. By "referenced section" do you mean that I should add references to the reference section, or create an entirely new Early history section with references, or ... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rogerfgay (talk • contribs).

Well, it hardly seems like this qualifies as the "Early history" of the ornithopter. What I would suggest is that you write a paragraph or so that is referenced via the guidelines laid out in WP:CITE. That should probably be placed at the bottom of the "manned flight section", or something else if unmanned. Once it's referenced, other Wikipedians will (I certainly would) take care to put it in the right place, if you're confused.

Oh, and remember to sign your comments.--Eyrian 20:54, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

This is just an opinion of course, but I still think this is early days for ornithopters. It seems to me that the very first flying robot is early history for flying robots, even though it happened recently. Thanks for the tips to the new guy. I appreciate it. (on my way to look at WP:CITE) --Rogerfgay

OK. I think I got it right this time, unless someone wants to move the section. --Rogerfgay

Looks solid, but I'd suggest using inline citations. --Eyrian 21:41, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Done. I recently learned about ref tags while editing another related article. Quite handy. There was already a section on the page for <references/>. Rogerfgay 16:15, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

redlinks in top links

(What with the contra corners diagram, I'll start by saying this is nothing personal. Only just now remembered that was you.)

I'm about to rerevert the top links in the contra dance article. Here's why:

Following the Manual of Style (MoS:DP#Redlinks), redlinks are allowed in disambiguation pages. Wikipedia:Disambiguation has no official ruling specifically on redlinks in top links, but top links defined under disambiguation pages.

In short, redlinks which meet criteria belong in a disambiguation page just as much (and for the same reasons) as redlinks in the body of an article. (See also the numerous mentions of redlinks currently in the discussions at Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation.)

On a related note: You're right, I should have used a template for the toplinks. I actually hadn't seen them before. -- Eitch 16:08, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Indeed they can have redlinks, but it's a question of having a blue link that is helpful as well. I looked over the blue link, and if I were looking for something on "contredanse", I'd be totally lost. I have no objection to linking it, just to providing links that aren't really related enough to be helpful. --Eyrian 17:40, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Guess I don't really know what you mean by "a blue link that is helpful as well." Won't the people in the intro music theory classes be grateful for the redirect to the music form? And I'm embarrassed: I meant to save my re-revert in a sandbox until hearing back from you, but got my tabbed windows mixed up. Sorry about that. --Eitch 19:06, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

So, a common case is a redlinked album with a bluelinked musician. The musician article will often tell you where the album fits into their discography, and give you a general bit of information on release date and such. But European classical music is such a vast topic, that if you're looking for what distinguishes a particular variety, you'll be totally lost. --Eyrian 19:22, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Ah, makes sense. It's Classical period (music), but WP article doesn't talk about dance forms at all. So really the more useful link is that external one (above). What do you think— something like "For the early- and middle-Classical music form see contredance (see also this article)?" It belongs in External Links, but no one will see it in time. "…(see also the article in External Links)?" --Eitch 14:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

It's probably best to just create a stub, and link to that. --Eyrian 17:24, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Amoeba

Randall is an amoeba though!!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.173.212.157 (talk • contribs).

I'm afraid I don't know what you're talking about. If you're genuinely trying to help out the encylopedia, please see the getting started page. --Eyrian 10:09, 13 June 2007 (UTC)