User talk:Sabrebd/Autoarchive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Led Zeppelin copyedit

Hi

I have asked the editor who was working on the article to give a status update. If they have withdrawn, I will carry-on from where they left off. If they have finished, then I am sure they will be happy to go over any work which has been updated. If not, I will do any necessary remedial work. Thanks :¬) Chaosdruid (talk) 17:08, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Looking at the history and some of our GOCE discussions it seems as though the editor has not done a ce on it. THe other editor, Mallaja, is not part of GOCE and so I would recommend that the ce be completed in full. I will see if anyone else is chomping at the bit to do the work and if not then I will do it, but probably tomorrow or very late tonight. Chaosdruid (talk) 17:19, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
I'm sure your right. Thanks.--SabreBD (talk) 19:27, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
I've stopped copyediting because the article looks fine. --Sp33dyphil © • © 23:50, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Ah, OK, I thought perhaps it was because someone else (not a guild member I think) had started. I may give Chaosdruid time to have a quick glance, but then I will be brave and put it up for GA. And then wait 6 months probably. Thanks for letting me know.--SabreBD (talk) 23:55, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
I will give it a read through later tonight, as I have some RL things to do this afternoon and evening, I'll drop you a message here once I have looked it over. I don;t think there will be that much of a wait, I only had to wait two weeks for my last GA nom, and as LZ are of such interest to us old farts I am sure someone will get onto it fairly quickly lol :¬) Chaosdruid (talk) 15:59, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Much appreciated--SabreBD (talk) 16:54, 30 October 2011 (UTC).
Sorry, I came down with a heavy cold/flu type thing. I am feeling better so will try and get it done later once the lemsip takes effect. Chaosdruid (talk) 13:54, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
Sorry to hear that. Hope the Lemsip does the trick. Its absolutely no problem, there is no great hurry, so don't feel you need to do it now if you are not up to it. All the best.--SabreBD (talk) 17:12, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
I did take a look at the whole thing, and did some copyediting to the last two or three sections - over to you and good luck ! Chaosdruid (talk) 19:36, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
That's great and very helpful. Fingers crossed off I got to GA review. Cheers.--SabreBD (talk) 19:38, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

To market, to market

I have tried to follow your suggestion, and believe I have recorded my proposed edits in the proper space (in the article's discussion page). I don not feel confident enough to make the edits without consensus from existing editors, so thanks for directing me to the proper space, and for considering the modification. Mrsbray (talk) 00:15, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

  • I am sure you have more pressing commitments than having a read through the Opie's entry, but in case you have, perhaps you will see why the article is incorrect as it stands? Crickets everywhere else in the room. Thank you.

Mrsbray (talk) 19:36, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

  • Opies', I mean :)

Mrsbray (talk) 00:17, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 November2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 13:10, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 November 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:17, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

All Around Amazing Barnstar
I guess I can't thank you enough for all your amazing efforts. Regards, Scieberking (talk) 13:37, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Scieberking. That will hopefully keep me going until Led Zep is a good article. Much appreciated.--SabreBD (talk) 18:36, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

I guess you can stop now[1]. Congratulations, keep up the good work. AIRcorn (talk) 10:56, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for a really helpful review. I think it has helped improved the article considerably and given us some issues that we can consider before a FA review. Can't ask for much more than that. Cheers.--SabreBD (talk) 15:10, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 November 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:40, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 November 2011

I am new

I am new to this forum and understand my first page was promotional. My second update was edited to state a fact. Is there something I need to do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by HumptyBooks (talk • contribs) 20:37, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi. There are three good reasons why your edit is likely to be reverted. First, it looks like a promotional entry: this impression is not helped by your user name, which, with this being your first edit appears suspiciously like a promotion. Second, it almost certainly fails Wikipedia guidelines on notability, i.e. this is not important to the article, as there are very many books on Humpty Dumpty and we certainly cannot list them all. Third, it is unsourced and therefore cannot be tested for verifiability: there are many unsourced edits in Wikipedia, but they should be sourced if they might be challenged and in an article that is sourced like are likely to be reverted. I would therefore suggest that if you want to edit on Wikipedia you take a look at the links to key policies I am about to post on your page and try a few sourced edits to start with before doing anything that might be considered controversial. Hope that helps.--SabreBD (talk) 21:53, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 December 2011

Black death

Dear Editor, Can you explain me please how can I change/update the page 'Black death' (disease) which is semi-protected? Looking forward to hearing from you, Secretareva (talk) 17:42, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi there. I presume this is because you have a new account are not an autoconfirmed user (which will take four days from registering) and therefore cannot yet edit a protected page. If there is something urgent you can make and edit request on the talkpage of the article (click on the link to find out how). If it is not urgent I suggest just waiting the four days and making at least ten positive edits. I have will also add some links to your talkpage which you might find useful on editing. Hope that is clear, and let me know if I can do anything else to help. All the best.--SabreBD (talk) 18:41, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Dear Editor, Thank you for your answer. I have tried everything that you told me. I registered few weeks ago, and did 10 edits, 4 days have passed and there was no change in my status. I also made a request edit and did not have any answer. It is kind of hopeless. Can you please check why I did not change the status or make the change for me? Thanks a lot and hope to hearing from you soon Secretareva (talk) 10:08, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I think you have to do the ten edits logged in to your new account and I notice you only have two so far. I didn't realise you had already made a request, presumably as an ip editor. Other editors cannot tell if an ip and an account editor are the same person. I will try to find time to look at it and respond at the article talkpage.--SabreBD (talk) 10:37, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

contributions

Dear Editor, I have made several contributions but in three languages - russian, french and english, and I noticed that my contributions are not listed in my account depending on the language. That's why you can only see 2 contibutions in my account of english-speaking wikipedia. Best regards Secretareva (talk) 12:00, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Medieval Scotland

Great work on various of these topics. Some, I think could initially be pushing towards GA? Rgds, --Bill Reid | (talk) 19:11, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks for that. I was thinking about going for GA soon on Scotland in the Late Middle Ages. It would be useful just to get someone else to cast an eye over it. I am aware that after a lot of changes I cannot see my own typos until I have left a bit of time. On the other hand I could just go for it and see what the reviewer says. Any views would be welcome.--SabreBD (talk) 19:29, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 December 2011

Awards and accolades

Draft

Throughout their career, Led Zeppelin have collected many honors and awards. They were inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 1995, and the UK Music Hall of Fame in 2004. Among the band’s many awards are an American Music Award in 2005, and the Polar Music Prize in 2006. Led Zeppelin were the recipient of a Grammy Lifetime Achievement Award in 2005, and four of their recordings have been inducted into the Grammy Hall of Fame. They have been awarded 5 Diamond albums, as well as 14 Multi-Platinum albums, 4 Platinum albums and 1 Gold album in the United States,1 while in the UK they have 5 Multi-Platinum albums, 6 Platinum albums, 1 Gold album and 4 Silver albums.2

The band are ranked number one on VH1's 100 Greatest Artists of Hard Rock and Classic Rock's "50 Best Live Acts of All Time". They were awarded an Ivor Novello Award for "Outstanding Contribution to British Music" in 1977, as well as a "Liftetime Achievement Award" at the 42nd Annual Ivor Novello awards ceremony in 1997. The band were honoured with the "Best Live Act" prize for their one-off reunion at MOJO Awards 2008, where they were described as the "greatest rock and roll band of all time".

Comments

Hi Sabre. Here's a rough draft. I haven't worked out the certifications, though. What else can we add? I remember shortening the old section that was too detailed. Also, Plant got his CBE for music, while Page was awarded his OBE for his charity work in Brazil. Let me know. Thanks. Scieberking (talk) 12:50, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Scieberking. Yeah that looks good so far, good work. The only other things I can think of are the Hall of Fame inductions for Led Zeppelin IV, "Stairway to Heaven", Led Zeppelin and "Whole Lotta Love" - perhaps we could mention that there were four songs? A pity not to include the CBE and OBE, but I will think about wording for that. I think you can go ahead with filling in the details of the awards and links and we will see how it looks.--SabreBD (talk) 21:29, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I'm done with adding the certifications (with help from Harout72) and also inserted the wikilinks. Scieberking (talk) 07:18, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
It looks great, but I think we can probably add something like "Page received and OBE for his charity work in 2005 and Plant received a CBE for services to popular music in 2009", perhaps at the start of the second paragraph. Apart from that and a little bit of US spelling my only issue is the minor one of whether Platinum, Gold and so on need cap. Do you think we can post it this weekend?--SabreBD (talk) 11:44, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

I think it could be something like this: "Jimmy Page was appointed an Officer of the Order of the British Empire (OBE) in recognition of his charity work in 2005 and Robert Plant was honoured as a Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE) for his services to popular music in 2009." I've read many reliable news stories that some politicians are actively campaigning to get Page knighted for his contributions to music. Sir Jimmy Page would sound very strange, won't it? Agree about the position. I'd picked the certification part from The Beatles article so there shouldn't be any issues regarding US spelling. Should be posted today I think. Many thanks. Scieberking (talk) 12:52, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

OK lets post it.--SabreBD (talk) 23:58, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

2112

Can you explain why Amazon is unreliable? --Jamcad01 (talk) 00:54, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Please the statement about using this page and an article talkpage at the top of this page.--SabreBD (talk) 01:02, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
God you are so arrogant. --Jamcad01 (talk) 03:01, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
Contrary to what you may think I and others have been extremely tolerant of your disruptive editing. I also offered you some friendly advice and you decided to treat it as vandalism. After that you cannot be particularly surprised if I do not wish to waste any more time on you on my talkpage. If you have points about an article, take them to the article talkpage please.--SabreBD (talk) 09:01, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Minor change

Hello again. I've an issue with this sentence:

Led Zeppelin have influenced hard rock and heavy metal bands such as Black Sabbath,[154] Rush,[155] Queen,[156] Megadeth,[157][158] Velvet Revolver,[159] Tool[160] and Dream Theater.[161]

(a) Because it looks ugly and cluttered (with the names of 7 bands in one place).
(b) Because it's not technically correct.

I think it should be:

Led Zeppelin have influenced hard rock and heavy metal bands such as Black Sabbath,[154] Rush,[155] Queen,[156] Megadeth,[157][158] and Velvet Revolver,[159] as well as progressive rock bands like Tool[160] and Dream Theater.[161]

Please let me know of your opinion on the above. Thanks. Scieberking (talk) 18:55, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Well I cannot see a big problem with this, but I cannot remember why we changed it in the first place. Was there some problem with the definition of the bands as progressive rock?--SabreBD (talk) 19:15, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
Not sure who has changed it... I think Dream Theater and Tool are pretty much progressive rock, or at least progressive metal. Scieberking (talk) 20:26, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
Progressive metal is probably safer. Why not go for it with that change.--SabreBD (talk) 20:38, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 Done. Thanks. Scieberking (talk) 22:16, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 December 2011

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Led Zeppelin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Subliminal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:52, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Seasons Greetings
Have a Merry Christmas
and a
Happy New Year

Apologies, slight technical problem in the Christmas Cheer Distribution Network Automated Felicitations System (no electricity) meant a small delay in getting my greetings out this year ... Chaosdruid (talk) 16:57, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

And from me. Congratulations on the GA. Ben MacDui 12:35, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for both, I appreciate it. Have a very merry one.--SabreBD (talk) 18:20, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 December 2011

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In your recent article edits, 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.

British rhythm and blues (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Stateside
Hard rock (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Back beat

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:41, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 January 2012

Article rockers.

Hello, well, the mods were never called rockers, the British rockers are the greasers, mods are associated with R & B and jazz, not rock music, mods and rockers are rivals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wisehelp (talk • contribs) 12:43, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

This comment should be on the article talkpage - not mine.--SabreBD (talk) 18:54, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

rocker (subculture)

Sorry, my inglish are bad, but I now, the rockers (ton-up boys)in the 1960s were commonly referred to asgreasers or grease as an insult by your rivals mods, and Mods never been called as rocker. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wisehelp (talk • contribs) 19:11, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 January 2012

Nobody's Fault but Mine genre

There is a discussion here that you might be interested in joining. Radiopathy •talk• 00:33, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 January 2012

The Signpost: 23 January 2012

The Signpost: 30 January 2012

The Signpost: 06 February 2012

WP Rock Music in the Signpost

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Rock Music for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 01:19, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Removal of italics on The Killing Time page

Hello there. I'm the person who posted Defoe's list on the page. I read your anti-italics manifesto, so I understand why you have removed the italics and I have no problem with it. Do you think, however, that the section should in some way appear in different format to distinguish it as a extract? Also, I'm not happy with the reference to Charles II that occurs in the following paragraph. In terms of sequencing, I feel that that part of the statement should appear earlier. As yet, I haven't been able to work out how to do that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.241.233.127 (talk) 00:33, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Led Zeppelin FAC

Thanks a bunch for listing me as a co-nominator. Regards, Scieberking (talk) 10:18, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 February 2012

The Signpost: 20 February 2012

Black Veil Brides/Blessed With A Broken Heart Inclusion on Glam Metal/List of Glam Metal pages

Hello. I apologize if this is not what you meant by "talk page." I am a familiar user of Wikipedia, but still don't know all its features. Anyways, I would like to talk about the inclusion of both bands listed above. I listen to alot of Metal, Glam Metal esspecially being my forte, and I have never once seen BVB or BWABH classified or even mentioned as part of the Glam Metal genre, or even classified as Metal. I've always seen them labeled as the following: Alternative Rock, Punk (or Pop-Punk), Emo and Post-Hardcore. You can ask my sister and her friends. They don't classify either band as Metal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.100.246.129 (talk) 20:14, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 February 2012

Article restructuring at the Beatles

There is a straw poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 23:28, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 4

Hi. When you recently edited Scotland in the High Middle Ages, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Means (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:12, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 March 2012

Talkback

Hello, Sabrebd. You have new messages at Talk:Psychedelic rock/GA1.
Message added 11:38, 9 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

GoPTCN 11:38, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Gothic rock

I have been working on both Gothic rock and goth Subsulture for several months. I explained in my recent edits why a chapter about fashion, movies, doesn't have its place on gothic rock. For now, it is up to you to expose your point of view on the gothic rock talk. Woovee (talk) 19:41, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

I did. Please respond there, rather than just reverting.--SabreBD (talk) 18:34, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

I hadn't seen this. I'm gonna read your comments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Woovee (talk • contribs) 18:37, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

I hope you take them in the positive spirit in which they are intended. I am not trying to overturn anyone's work here, just to improve the article.--SabreBD (talk) 19:09, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 March 2012

Unjustified reversions

Hi Sabrebd, regarding your reversion on Led Zeppelin, please see WP:REVEXP. Thank you --Chealer (talk) 07:22, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Since I gave an explanation, and invited you to go to the talkpage, I have no idea what the problem with this revert is.--SabreBD (talk) 07:31, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi, where did you give an explanation? --Chealer (talk) 03:29, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
In the edit summary.--SabreBD (talk) 07:26, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
There is no justification in the edit summary ("Reverted to revision 480520605 by Sabrebd: rvt recent major changes - if there is an arguement for a change of organisation or a question about content plz take it to the talkpage first. (TW)"). --Chealer (talk) 21:34, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
This is the slowest argument I have ever had. If you feel that my edit summary was inadequate then I apologise, but I do deal with large numbers of edits like this and frankly if you want to change the way in which an article is organised in the middle of a Featured Article review, which was the case at the time, then it is probably a good idea to take it to the talkpage, which is what I recommend if you want to argue for the change.--SabreBD (talk) 22:00, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I do not consider the article undergoing review as a good reason for reverting changes without justification. If that is considered as a good reason, then editing should be restricted somehow, or this fact should be indicated to editors. In any case, the point of this was that whatever the reason you revert a change is, good or bad, it should be explained. I do think that the edit summary was inadequate. If you deal with large numbers of edits like this, I suggest you revise your practice, or seek a change of WP:REVEXP. --Chealer (talk) 23:12, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Evidently you missed the apology part in my last part - so I have a suggestion for you - get over it.--SabreBD (talk) 23:22, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
I saw your apology, but I disagreed with the "but". Even if you act the same in other cases, your action in this case is no more adequate. I am not asking for an apology here, nor trying to argue for the change. All I want is that such incidents stop. --Chealer (talk) 00:16, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

re your GAN nomination Jack and Jill (nursery rhyme)

Hi,

I've made a few comments on your nomination at Talk:Jack and Jill (nursery rhyme)/GA1. In general, it's a great subject but it needs more information.

Please feel free to contact me with comments or questions. Regards, MathewTownsend (talk) 22:34, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Unfortunately I a bit busy in the real world at the moment, but I will try to take a look at these soon.--SabreBD (talk) 09:10, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
Nice article! I just added a couple of comments. MathewTownsend (talk) 00:22, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Just one question: Does "Roud Folk Song Index number of 10266" mean it is the 10266 most mentioned out of over 300,000 or what? MathewTownsend (talk) 15:58, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
As I understand it the numbers are allocated more of less randomly, but because the database started with older collections, generally speaking the lower the number, the older the song. In a database of 300,000, 10266 is a fairly old number, but not remarkably so.--SabreBD (talk) 16:14, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
If Round is not particularly meaningful, then more is need in the lede per WP:LEAD: "The lead should define the topic and summarize the body of the article with appropriate weight." MathewTownsend (talk) 16:25, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Passed. Congratulations. A nice little article - well done! MathewTownsend (talk) 17:42, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Many thanks for a very helpful and rapid interview, for the first nursery rhyme article to gain GA status on Wikipedia I believe.--SabreBD (talk) 18:09, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 March 2012

Thanks!

Thanks for your continued assistance at the Nickelback article. It's nice working with someone else who knows Wikipedia policy. I appreciate it. Sergecross73 msg me 02:00, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

You are very welcome. I know from personal experience that just a bit of support when you are trying to hold the line on policy makes it all seem a lot more worthwhile.--SabreBD (talk) 10:05, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 March 2012

Rhythm and blues

I've left a message on their talk page - hopefully they will explain their reasons for what seem to be good faith, though unexplained, edits. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:05, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks.--SabreBD (talk) 07:18, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
And congrats on making it to Signpost! Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:42, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, but I am there because I was the only one who answered.--SabreBD (talk) 11:42, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Sithma

Do you think I coud ask you to offer an opinion at the Scotland in the High Middle Ages review? SandyG correctly predicted that things are a little slow at FAR these days and if it's going to be forgotten about I'd rather there was something clear for the closing authority to consider. Ben MacDui 19:37, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Sure will do. Be a shame for all your good work to go to waste.--SabreBD (talk) 00:49, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Good news and many thanks for your help with this. It's remarkable that it took about 300 edits to create the FA in the first place and about half that to maintain this status. Ben MacDui 18:47, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
Your are welcome. Good job on rescuing the article. I have one or two sourced bits to add and it would be great if you could give them the once over, particularly with a view to matter in the Gàidhealtachd.--SabreBD (talk) 10:52, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
The content looks good at first sight, although I notice we know have the Treaty of Perth appearing in 3 places! I don't have the patience for it right now but I'll take a proper look tomorrow. Ben MacDui 18:16, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. Its a fair point on the Treaty of Perth. I think it will be easiest to edit down the recent addition, since it comes last. I will take a look when I get a moment over the weekend.--SabreBD (talk) 19:34, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Rocker (subculture)

The film: Estilo de vida del movimineto rockero. It is a reposting of the rocker subculture in Ecuador and is a reliable and independent source, this according to the rules of Wikipedia and even serves as reference for the article. Wisehelp (talk) 03:39, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

This is not a subject for my talkpage, but for the article talkpage and I am moving it there accordingly.--SabreBD (talk) 08:31, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 April 2012

Disambiguation link notification for April 7

Hi. When you recently edited Warfare in Medieval Scotland, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Carlisle and Selkirk (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:02, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 April 2012

Disambiguation link notification for April 15

Hi. In your recent article edits, 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.

Christianity in Medieval Scotland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to St. Colman
Economy of Scotland in the Middle Ages (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Coulter
Government in Medieval Scotland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Perth

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:19, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 April 2012

Barnstar for you

The United Kingdom Barnstar of National Merit
For your contribution to Medieval Scotland articles. Keep up the great work. Newm30 (talk) 00:02, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks for this. Shallow person that I am, it is always nice to have a bit of encouragement for one's labours.--SabreBD (talk) 06:30, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Its a shame there is no specific Scottish Barnstar. Your efforts are appreciated. Newm30 (talk) 08:55, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
That is a good point. Perhaps we should make one.--SabreBD (talk) 17:07, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Religion In The UK

Hello Sabrebd, you deleted a BSA Survey table I made because the citation link was broken. Please try this link: [[2]] and put the table back if possible. Sorry about that and thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by North Shields Tyneside (talk • contribs) 13:48, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 23

Hi. In your recent article edits, 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.

Art in Medieval Scotland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to High Cross and Romanesque
Scottish art (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to High Cross

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:25, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sabrebd/Autoarchive_3&oldid=1181443101"