Welcome!
Hello, McTavidge, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! --Lukobe 08:11, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
| ||
|
The question of capitalising of the letter "t" in The of The Beatles has been raised again. It appears that UK style references (here and here) also maintains that the letter should be in lower case. If the Project is to be appear professional then it may have to change the format. Polite discussion is invited at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject The Beatles/Policy. If possible, please provide sources/references to support your position.
It has been a fairly quiet time with regard to the Project (or at least that is how it seems). If you are reading this and wondering why your efforts in respect of a Beatles article has not been mentioned, it may be that you haven't told any editor. This is your Newsletter, which means you can contribute to it, so please do! 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 010 – January/February 2007). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!
| |
|
Complete To Do List Make visible or invisible by clicking ShoworHide, respectively.
As the project is currently just starting, our more experienced editors are working on the project infrastructure, classifying articles, and listing/assessing red links. Your assistance is welcome. If you would prefer to just edit - and why wouldn't you? - we have a choice selection of red links to turn blue and articles to clean! Now let's get busy.
If you complete one of these tasks, please remove it from the list and add your achievement to the project log. | ||
Hey there, You need to warn the fellow first--try one of the {{test1}}{{test2}}{{test3}}{{test4}} series. After that, post on Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism . Hope that helps--lemme know if it's unclear-- Lukobe 19:22, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please post questions on the talk page. Adding comments disrupts the flow of the text to those editing. Thank you. -- Avi 06:19, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rather than reverting edits, you should put comments on the talk page. Wikipedia content should be verifiable. I tried to verify everything on the original NAIC definition from the NAIC website itself at the time I wrote it. If you disagree, or if you have an example of someone mistakenly calling the NAIC a regulator, that's another matter. I kept some of your other edits because I respect your right to contribute to the page and only deleted the part that lacks any foundation at all -- if you strongly disagree, let's take it to the NAIC talk page.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 15:07, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In case you are not watching the page, I have now formalised the policy to reflect the proper way of refering to the band. The announcement is here, and the wording is on the main page. Your help in applying this policy to the articles would be appreciated. LessHeard vanU 15:02, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So, it's now the Beatles, is it? Every mention of The Band should be changed (in the middle of a sentence) to the Band. "At the gig, Bob Dylan and the Band.... which means his 'backing band', and not The Band. Explanation:
It's a question of emphasis... andreasegde 17:42, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was going to step away from this, since I was only going by the rules and I didn't want to get into a big dispute (especially with editors who I respect and have enjoyed working with), but recent events have brought me back.
The debate about naming the convention regarding the capitalisation or not of the letter "t" of theint/The Beatles has been going on for a while. I have endured the snide remarks of a Twit, and have engaged in civil debate with some others who continued to question Project policy regarding the issue. I pointed out the need to establish a reasonable argument for their viewpoint over and above that of some professional knowledge so there could be a debate. When they did provide reasonable grounds for reopening the debate I used the offices of the Beatles Newsletter Issue 9:Issue of the Month to request comment, debate on the matter. There was no response. In the next Newsletter Issue 10:Issue of last Month I commented that there had been no response, and that the Project policy would be altered to use of the lowercase. Again, nobody other than the proponents responded. After a brief while I did as I said I would, and amended the Policy.
The new Policy is not to the liking of some of the editors involved the the Beatles Project (as the previous one was not to others.) After the policy was implemented reasons and arguments for retaining the previous convention were given. Authorities were cited and some discussion was created. Very recently more than one editor has edited Beatles related articles specifically to reflect the previous policy.
My preference is to capitalise the letter toftheinthe Beatles.
Wikipedia has very few rules; two of the most important relate to consensus and verifiability.
Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles has a specific area for the implementation (following debate and consensus) of Policy. The associate talkpage records the debate and the arguments used in reaching Policy decisions. The Project also maintains the principle of abiding by the rules that have been agreed, and the fundemental Wikipedia ethos of consensus.
No recent discussion occurred when the matter of the use of lowercase or uppercase was notified in two Newsletters, other than between myself and the proponents of lowercase at the Policy talkpage. Since Policy implementation discussion has only occurred on the talkpages of concerned editors, or on the talkpages of some of the articles, and not at the Policy talkpage.
More than one editor has unilaterally decided to ignore the new Policy, going so far as to amend articles to reflect the previous convention.
The Beatles Project is being disrupted by editors who I personally know to be conscientious and dedicated contributors of long and good standing. In that there is now occurring what might be considered vandalism (the knowing altering of articles in a manner that is against Wikipedian and Project rules and policy), likely as a result of their strongly held views, I believe that this matter needs urgent addressing. I am copying this to the Policy talkpage, and to all the editors involved in formulating the new policy and the recent opponents. I suggest that this debate is taken there, and that this matter is decided in a civil manner in accordance with the principles of Wikipedia.
I am deeply saddened that it has come to this. I am depressed that editors (people) whose integrity and civility (not to say sheer fun) I had been proud to be associated with have acted in (what I see as) bad faith and flagrant disregard for the rules and guidelines of both Wikipedia and The Beatles Project. LessHeard vanU 23:58, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Your question about simplification may be answered by Tor Books' explanation of imprints. It applies to the publishing industry, but is pretty much the same for record labels. —mjb 03:48, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It may be that us proponents of big T will not find an authority for us to use. However, as "lack of evidence is not evidence of lack" it is unlikely that that scenario would end the possibility of the debate being rekindled; what I'm saying is that the matter may just be left in abeyance. It may be that someone (possibly me) will one day make a comment that current policy is unlikely to be challenged in the near future, but that will depend on how long we are prepared to search should nothing turn up.
I am going to announce in the next Newsletter that little t is now policy, and request/require Project Members abide by it. I would comment that you haven't done anything really wrong in asking if us Big T'ters have found any grounds, as it was your prompting that got me to decide to announce the change of policy when I did. I may have waited longer for a response. It just seems that you might be a little over-anxious to conclude things; a perfectly reasonable wish but one which might not happen. The best thing is to keep an eye on the policy pages and subscribe to the Newsletter, if things don't appear to be developing then energies can be better spent on the articles.
If you do find people changing the t back to Big just revert them. I don't think you will find it will be any people you have recently debating with (we agree to disagree, but we will abide by policy) and if you need backup then please call on me or User:Lar (he is an Admin, which helps) as we are both very policy orientated.
Despite (or indeed because of) our debate I think you are the type of editor this project needs, knowledgable, civil, and enthusiastic. I hope you stick around. If us Big T'ters ever do find something to bring to the debate then I trust you will be there to put your side of the argument.
Cheers. LessHeard vanU 22:59, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OED (2d Edition, 1989) (From the defintion of "Beatle" (used as an adjective (attributive), as in, "I dig that Beatle haircut.") Applied attrib. to the hair-style or other characteristics of ‘The Beatles’ or of their imitators. Also, Beatlemania [-MANIA], addiction to the Beatles and their characteristics; the frenzied behaviour of their admirers. Hence other nonce-formations (see quots.). 1963 The Beatles 3 Their unique hair-styles have forced hair-dressers to follow the Beatle cutfor girls as well as boys. 1963 Daily Tel. 1 Nov. 15/6 Beatle fans hold up premier's car. 1963 Times 27 Dec. 4/6 The social phenomenon of Beatlemania, which finds expression in handbags, balloons and other articles bearing the likeness of the loved ones, or in the hysterical screaming of young girls whenever the Beatle Quartet performs in public. 1964 Daily Tel. 10 Feb. 1/3 Outside, hundreds of squealing Beatlemaniacs carried such signs as ‘We love younever leave us’. Ibid. 20 Feb. 22/7 The first export consignment of Beatle wallpaper will be flown from Manchester to Canada to-day. 1964 Daily Mail 11 Feb. 6/8, I hope someone explains to the Americans that we wear our Beatle wigs and bowlers on separate occasions. 1968 Courier-Mail (Brisbane) 22 June 3/3 Of the Beatles he [sc. Maharishi Yogi] said: ‘..They weren't prepared to end their beatledom for meditation.’
|
WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
| ||
|
See below. There is genuine concern that the Newsletter is getting stale in terms of content and variety, and that the same individuals are featured each month. Furthermore, lack of "news" is hindering the timely distribution as the editors wait for something to report. All Project editors are encouraged to give their news, suggestions and thoughts to keep the 'Letter vital and interesting. If making direct contributions do not appeal, please give a mention on the Newsletter talkpage and it will be incorporated!
Help is needed for the job of putting future Newsletters together. The present incumbent is finding it difficult to reflect the breadth of the Project, focusing on much the same individuals and articles each month, and has decided to beg for contributions from other individuals. Interested persons need only start working on next months issue to qualify. It really is that simple! 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 012 – April 2007). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!
| |
|
Complete To Do List Make visible or invisible by clicking ShoworHide, respectively.
As the project is currently just starting, our more experienced editors are working on the project infrastructure, classifying articles, and listing/assessing red links. Your assistance is welcome. If you would prefer to just edit - and why wouldn't you? - we have a choice selection of red links to turn blue and articles to clean! Now let's get busy.
If you complete one of these tasks, please remove it from the list and add your achievement to the project log. | ||
delivered by ++Larbot - run by User:Lar - t/c 00:12, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
|
WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
| ||
|
This has been a tumultuous month for the project yet again. We need your input on how the project should work and what it's role should be. And we need to start getting Featured Articles, folks! :)
This is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 013 – May 2007). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!
| |
|
Complete To Do List Make visible or invisible by clicking ShoworHide, respectively.
As the project is currently just starting, our more experienced editors are working on the project infrastructure, classifying articles, and listing/assessing red links. Your assistance is welcome. If you would prefer to just edit - and why wouldn't you? - we have a choice selection of red links to turn blue and articles to clean! Now let's get busy.
If you complete one of these tasks, please remove it from the list and add your achievement to the project log. | ||
BetacommandBot 23:54, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Your user name is on the “Inactive, or have just popped out for a cup of tea...” list on the Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles page. You can move it back to the “Participants” list if you feel this is not the case. :) -- WikiProject The Beatles 15:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please take a look at Talk:The_Beatles#reliable_sources_using_"the_Beatles"_or_"The_Beatles" Thanks, Espoo (talk) 19:38, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've responded to your question on this topic at [[3]]. Tim Ross (talk) 18:34, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Sir or Madam, If you wish to childishly insult someone, I suggest you do so on the talk page of the article in question, rather than on the person's own talk page. Sincerely, NJSustainNjsustain (talk) 19:58, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, this message is to inform you that there is currently a public poll here, to determine whether to capitalize the definite article ("the") when mentioning the band "THE BEATLES" mid-sentence. As you've previously participated either here, here, here, or here, your input would be appreciated. Thank you for your time. ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 23:53, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, McTavidge. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, McTavidge. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, McTavidge. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
| Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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 |
