User talk:JaneOlds

You all have been most kind and I can't thank you enough.JaneOlds (talk) 17:31, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification Jane - I wasn't too sure which one it was but figured a 17 year old might be too young for Montreux - I stand corrected DISEman (talk) 07:08, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Oliver Nelson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Joe Newman. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Big Bags

added a link pointing to John S. Wilson

Satan in High Heels

added a link pointing to John S. Wilson

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:BigBandBossaNovaStanGetz.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:39, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Peter Gunn (song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bill Holman. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:38, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JaneOlds. Some time ago, a file you uploaded — File:JohnnyHelmsJazzTrumpeter.png — was tagged with {{OTRS pending}}, indicating that you (or perhaps the copyright holder if you did not create this image) submitted a statement of permission to [email protected]. Though there is often a backlog processing messages received at this address, we should have received your message by now.

• If you have not submitted (or forwarded) a statement of permission, please send it immediately to [email protected] and let us know at the OTRS noticeboard that you have done so.

• If you have already sent this message, it is possible that there was a problem receiving it. Please re-send it to [email protected] and let us know at the OTRS noticeboard that you have done so.

If we don't hear from you within one week, the file will be deleted. If we can help you, please feel free to ask at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 14:37, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JaneOlds, I saw where you expressed confusion about this message at User_talk:Eurodog. For most images to be used on Wikipedia, the copyright holder - usually the person who took the photo - must explicitly grant a statement of permission compatible with Wikipedia's licensing model. We have a sample statement of permission at WP:CONSENT that we ask for the copyright holder to submit.

At File:JohnnyHelmsJazzTrumpeter.png, you said, "Johnny Helms is quite old and does not use the internet so getting permission from him will be difficult or impossible. I am positive that he has absolutely no objection to using the photo in his Wikipedia article." This does not meet Wikipedia's requirements for two reasons:

1. The copyright holder must explicitly grant us the statement of license we need, not simply fail to object to it. In the United States, since 1978, every creative work has been automatically copyrighted at the point of creation - even if you don't put a copyright notice on it, it is still subject to copyright protection. Unlike almost every other website on the planet, Wikipedia is not satisfied to simply use the image without permission and then remove it if someone objects.
2. The copyright holder is generally the person who took the photo, unless the copyright was transferred contractually or was a "work product" taken by an employee. Who took this photo? Even though Johnny Helms is deceased, the photographer may still be living and that is the person whose permission we need anyway.

I hope this helps. If there is any more information you need, please let me know. Also, I would invite any suggestions you have about how we can make the above template clearer. --B (talk) 12:58, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I will inquire with locals for a photo of Johnny Helms — Eurodog (talk) 19:57, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I notice you changed the order of the Review scores, moving the Penguin Guide rating I had just added below the Allmusic one. I don't care either way, but I can't help but be curious: why did you go to the trouble? Is there some principle involved? Languagehat (talk) 13:31, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Languagehat: What I actually did was move the Down Beat rating above the AllMusic score. There's far too much reliance on AllMusic here on Wikipedia and since Down Beat magazine is a very respected publication that has been around since the 1930s I wanted to emphasize its rating. Furthermore, the Down Beat review is mentioned in the "Reception" section with a link to reviewer Pete Welding and I moved it up too.

These ratings can be reordered by renumbering and quite often an editor will use a duplicate number and in essence void another rating. I've encountered this problem many times so I'm constantly checking and tweaking certain articles.

Feel free to renumber the ratings if you wish but please leave Down Beat as number one. JaneOlds (talk) 14:16, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That makes perfect sense, and I definitely agree there's too much reliance on AllMusic on Wikipedia! Thanks for the quick response. Languagehat (talk) 18:00, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:JohnnyHelmsJazzTrumpeter.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. B (talk) 11:37, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Robert Prince (composer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Wild, Wild West. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:41, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Undid revision 680575300 Why?

These are musicians. Lil Ru is actually already mentioned under Notable musicians and bands. Is that where they should be added? I don't think you can limit "musician" to someone who sings or plays music on an "instrument". A musician is one who composes, conducts, or performs music.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Seven Steps to Heaven, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Tony Williams and Frank Butler. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:45, 3 November 2015 (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) 16:49, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bob Belden, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charleston. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:25, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote on my wall : "My dear Bespin74, You do not "own" the John Williams Discography! Please be aware that repeated uses of the undo function or making the same edit over and over is considered "edit warring" and could result in your being banned."

First of all, change the tone with me. Second, I'm the creator of this Discography and currently it's main editor. I've created also a web disco that is complementary (http://www.goplanete.com/johnwilliams/music/disco/albums.htm). I was currently standardizing the terms to split correctly the difference between the trues reissues and the "releases" on alternative support (those albums released on a mono LP and also a stereo LP by the same time). In the Wiki disco, I really don't want to write the Label numbers, so... I can't simply write "Release in 1960, Columbia, Stereo". It's ambiguous. Does it refer to the main entry? No, in this case I want to state clearly that another LP was also released, but this time in Stereo. So for these cases, I've decided to write "Also released" instead of just "Released".

It's my choice, and I was just trying to standardize all , but then you came in.

Your edits are welcome, but please, let me finish my standardization.

Thanks.

--Bespin74 (talk) 19:45, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove information from articles, as you did to Columbia, South Carolina. Wikipedia is not censored, and content is not removed on the sole grounds of perceived offensiveness. Please discuss this issue on the article's talk page to reach consensus rather than continuing to remove the disputed material. If the content in question involves images, you also have the option to configure Wikipedia to hide the images that you may find offensive. Thank you. John from Idegon (talk) 04:27, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JaneOlds. You have new messages at John from Idegon's talk page.
Message added 05:13, 28 December 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

John from Idegon (talk) 05:13, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jane, I saw your note on John from Idegon's talk page and wanted to write. I understand your concern about adding Dylann Roof to the Columbia, South Carolina article. This evil person brought nothing but misery to the lives of many.

A part of Wikipedia I've edited extensively is the history of Mississippi, and frequently that history includes terrible abuses of human rights, such as slavery, lynchings, and segregation. But to exclude that would be to distort the facts, which Wikipedia editors strive not to do. Wikipedia is, after all, an encyclopia, and its readers want clarity.

For that reason a cornerstone policy on Wikipedia is the need to keep a neutral tone, and under the umbrella of neutrality is that Wikipedia be free of editorializing. This is better explained in what Wikipedia is not. The evil killer you wanted removed from the Columbia article is just that, but he is "notable" by Wiki standards, and his evil has been widely reported. Readers will quickly come to the same conclusion about Roof and his actions, but sadly, it is now part of Columbia's history. Magnolia677 (talk) 12:31, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Jay for pointing out the "live" discrepancies with the Kenton albums from the Rendezvous Ballroom and the Riverside Hotel - I note that Capitol Studios had some teething problems in the early years and this probably contributed to the use of alternative recording sites. DISEman (talk) 01:01, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bob Belden, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Verve. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:33, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have really slow Internet and don't try to do research at home, but at least now I have this reminder to do research at the library where the Internet is faster.

It takes a lot of effort but I can listen to KKOV online. Once I have been to a web site such as Wikipedia, it is much faster. So KKOV plays this Isabel Rose version a lot. Their music is supplied by America's Best Music, used by many radio stations nationwide, which would seem to make the song notable. I knew I was taking a risk not researching it to make sure the listing was justified. But now I have this reminder to research it.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:26, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

HI, I've opened this discussion on the Frank Rosolino page regarding the lead. Thanks. Rockypedia (talk) 14:36, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JaneOlds. 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]

It's not obvious to me what a first-call Hollywood studio musician is. I doubt it's obvious to the majority of readers. I find embellishments such as "first call" and "prominent" slightly cloying and insistent, even if true. Perhaps especially if true. I know that because these terms are sourced they don't violate WP rules against puffery and peacock terms. It's simply my own preference, a matter of style perhaps, to let the facts speak for themselves in an encyclopedia and avoid the odor (ordure?) of promotion and advertising. I see so much of that on Wikipedia.
–Vmavanti (talk) 04:26, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your help on the Bill Holman page but please let me try to do some work on this before it comes to a conclusion in the next week or so. There are a number of corrections and additions that have to be made. The page has been woefully inadequate for years now. As an editor that has worked on a number of jazz/composer/musician pages and I actually know Willis this will take while. I am trying to make the page far better formatted as to other like pages; the credits were very poorly done years ago. Holman's credits should actually be a separate wiki page but that is a great deal of time in addition to getting the basic page cleaned up.

A fully edited page that I have done can be seen with Gary Foster.

Thanks Shelyric (talk) 16:30, 1 July 2017 (UTC)shelyric[reply]

Hello, JaneOlds. 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]

Should that Terry Gibbs material be sourced?
–Vmavanti (talk) 17:16, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Columbia, South Carolina has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Jane, you've been warned before about mislabeling vandalism edits. In the edit in question, an editor substituted an unsourced figure for capacity of an areana for another unsourced figure. Who are you to say he did that to damage the encyclopedia (because that is what vandalism is). Frankly, it makes more sense to me that the capacity of the arena would be the same for two different teams playing the same game than it would for it to be different. Best solution would be to source it. John from Idegon (talk) 13:05, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism isn't just being wrong. If it were, everyone would be guilty of vandalism. It's the intent to do harm. Using the word incorrectly probably does more harm than actual vandalism, which is often simply teenage mischief.Vmavanti (talk) 16:40, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JaneOlds. 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]