User talk:Notthesameasyouremail

To Notthesameasyouremail, I notice you have edited the Ralph McTell article. I removed the now-defunct link to an old McTell site and substituted a current link to the main fansite, a change requested by the subject of the article. Another user reverted my edit. I would be grateful for your assistance in keeping this article factually correct and up-to-date by removing any reverts to the old, incorrect, information. Thank you.

Acknowledged and agreed. Wikipedia pages appear all over the web and should be relevant, accurate, verifiable and current. I am more than happy to help you in this. Notthesameasyouremail (talk) 11:26, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Ralph McTell Eight Frames a Second.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

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

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 22:42, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Licence added. Is this sufficient?Notthesameasyouremail (talk) 01:28, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, editorwithalongfunnylookingname! Thanks for taking my assessment to heart on the tags I posted. Just so you don't think I'm being a stickler for its own sake, I can't tell you how important cites are to readers. It's the only way they have to verify what we write, and frankly, I don't trust anything that's not referenced. As for editors, without cites, it becomes extremely difficult to add to an article or clarify things without being able to confirm the existing material. I also understand how tedious it is to dredge up and fill in references for statements, however routine. For example, I try not to cut anything somebody else wrote (unless it's flat out wrong). Instead, I'll often spend an hour or more hunting down a source and doing whatever re-write might also be needed. Silly me.

On that note, if there's any way I can help with the Ralph McTell article, let me know. I don't have access to the books cited here, so that's pretty much out. But I am interested in the subject and would be willing to scour the internet for references to confirm what I can. If I might suggest, the best approach is to take the article apart a statement at a time, find the source and add the citation. Since the sources here were probably used multiple times, what you do is use a full citation for the first occurrence, then the next time simply use (ref)author page#(/ref) to cite the work and the page. Note that I'm using parentheses here instead of angle brackets so WP doesn't confuse the example as a citation. At any rate, let me know if I can be of assistance. Signed, editorwithashortlookingfunnyname. Allreet (talk) 23:49, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to explain and for offering to help. I have added citations throughout the article. Some statements remain unsourced - please review and comment on whether you regard them as contentious or libellous and should be removed. Notthesameasyouremail (talk) 19:21, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Notthesameasyouremail! I'm impressed by your thoroughness and dilligence. I wouldn't worry at all about the relatively few statements that are left unsourced. If someone else has a reservation, they can always add a "fact" (citation needed) template here or there, but I doubt that'll happen since there's nothing here to raise an eyebrow. Meanwhile, I've removed the BLP template. Thanks for taking this to heart. Allreet (talk) 21:34, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, Allreet. Can you please take a look at the discussion on 'Article Rating' on the Ralph McTell discussion page and suggest further improvements? Notthesameasyouremail (talk) 23:14, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, again! I only briefly looked at FAR-related comments and instead dug right into the article. Along the way, I took the liberty of making minor copyedits - a word here and there and some small sentence reconstructions. Overall, it reads very well; if not, I would have changed much, much more. Hope you agree with the revisions, small as they are, but feel free to revert where you might disagree. At any rate, the one comment I saw about what was characterized as strange construction doesn't seem to apply at all or at least not with what has been changed subsequently. I'll get back to this later - tomorrow if not tonight. One thing I would suggest immediately is to replace "Ralph"s with "McTell"s. Bios should be distanced from their subjects, that is, more formal. All that aside, you should be proud of the considerable work you've done on this story. As for my own "meddling", I long ago learned that every writer needs an editor, and besides, collaboration is half the fun of what goes on around here. A last word: all this seems to be on the right track. Cheers. Allreet (talk) 23:46, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the surname, the style is more akin to newspapers. Most bios take this approach, though "up close and personal" accounts can be more informal and use the first name throughout. Usually, however, if you see an article in Wikipedia that does use the first name, you're bound to find WP:POV problems, and there's also a good chance the material was copied directly from either the artist's website or a fansite (a copyright problem). As for finishing the review, I'll catch up with the rest tonight (EDT/US). I thought I'd go through it first just to get my own impressions before reading anyone else's comments. Allreet (talk) 17:24, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

McTell's nautral birth name, as I'm sure you've found out, presents a logistical problem that makes the substitutions difficult, particularly before he actually adopted the name, but I think I have a solution. At the end of the lead paragraphs, the influence of Willie McTell is mentioned. At that point, the name switch can be worked in. For example:

McTell's guitar playing was modeled on the style of many of America's legendary country blues guitar players, such as Blind Blake, Robert Johnson and Blind Willie McTell. These influences led a friend to suggest that he change his professional name to McTell just as his career was beginning to take shape.

Or something along those lines. From there, you can easily (and legitimately) make the substitutions throughout the rest of article, even though he wasn't known as McTell during the early years. But the more I read through this, the clearer it becomes that the switch should be made. I also understand that you've worked with the article long enough that the change probably seems strange or uncomfortable; that is, you're so used to reading and writing the first name that it's difficult to appreciate how the switch would be an improvement. Trust me and other editors. The opposite will be noticed by readers, whereas the use of the last name will seem natural to them. Allreet (talk) 14:01, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote much of the original article (and I know the subject reasonably well) and Allreet's suggestion seems both logical and desirable to me. Andy F (talk) 20:36, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Notthesameasyouremail, I see you have done much work on the discography. You may care to address this point. Keep up the good work Andy F (talk) 20:36, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Notthesameasyouremail

You have done a lot of painstaking work on the Ralph McTell article and deserve this Barnstar. You can leave it here or put it on your user page.

		The Original Barnstar
		For your work on improving the article about Ralph McTell and keeping it up to date. Andy F (talk) 08:52, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why, thank you, kind sir! Notthesameasyouremail (talk) 00:11, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jumping the gun slightly - album not due in shops until October so I've changed tense and added dates. Revert to past tense in Oct? Andy F (talk) 11:51, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Will do, Andy, unless you do first ;~)). Notthesameasyouremail (talk) 13:36, 30 August 2010 (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) 13:48, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Notthesameasyouremail. 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, I'm KGirlTrucker81. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Ralph McTell— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. KGirl ^{(Wanna chat?)} 14:03, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reply on KG's Talk page:

Hello KGirlTrucker81,

Thanks for your message regarding my Ralph McTell edit. It was not a mistake. The anecdote I highlighted was first added to the article by an anonymous user on 29 March 2017. The history shows the following amends:

• 29 Mar Anecdote added by anonymous user with long hex handle
• 29 Mar Undone by me
• 29 Mar Redone by anonymous user with a different long hex handle
• 1 Apr Deleted by Fitindia after I asked Wiki police for advice
• 2 Apr Restored by anonymous user with a standard IP address
• 2 Apr Reverted by Fitindia
• 2 Apr Restored by IP Man
• Wiki Police out off ideas so I left it a month
• 8 May Undone by me
• 19 Jly Restored by IP Man with feigned justification
• 23 Jly Lie exposed in article by me

If you have any influence or ideas on how to stop this persistent spammer, I'd appreciate your help, please.

With thanks and best wishes.

Notthesameasyouremail (talk) 14:24, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To which KG responded:

@Notthesameasyouremail: The edit was vandalism, so please edit carefully and seriously or risk getting blocked for vandalism. KGirl (Wanna chat?) 14:25, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

OK, back to plan A... Notthesameasyouremail (talk) 14:43, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Notthesameasyouremail. 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, Notthesameasyouremail. 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]