Jump to content

Talk:Johnny Kalsi

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

WikiProject class rating

[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 18:20, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting disaster cleanup

[edit]

Well, can't claim to know anything about the topic, but I can at least try to get the article looking like something... 12.2.137.34 (talk) 18:35, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Well, it's still pretty much a disaster, but it's slightly better than it was. 12.2.137.34 (talk) 18:42, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting two years later

[edit]

I don't know the topic well, but have done more copyediting and will return for more intense scrutiny. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 04:21, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PEACOCK POV "JOHNNY" (first name basis) LOVE FEST

[edit]

I have spent the better part of two days attempting to unlink photos with copyright symbols ON THEM, ON THE PAGE, taking the reader to someone's MySpace but Also to Wikimedia Commons. I work hard at cleaning up the messes that people leave behind-- or get big pats on the back for starting new articles with no references, that half the time are copyright violations, and yet, I don't see anyone giving folks MORE love for bringing a stub to a C level article. Is that so much to ask? I've been editing for years, but this has frustrated me beyond belief. Time for a complete re-write OR deletion of the article. I don't care anymore. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 23:37, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Class

[edit]

I don`t hink it qualifies as a stub article anymore.Francis E Williams (talk) 15:41, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. Frankly, I think, with some items still missing (as we mentioned) and the "Alaap" band being just a mystery with no source, I'd be torn between moving it from "Stub" to "Start", rather than "C class", but it's close anyway, as long as folks are willing to try to address some of those things. Thanks for your work! --Leahtwosaints (talk) 01:51, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article has been independantly assessed by the Wikipedia project associated with biographies.[1] It was "Stub", "C" and "Start" all in one day!. Absolutely amazing!. I cannot comment why this should be. All links that could be considered copyright material or advertising were assessed and "pulled" already. All the internet references are continually updated by page watchers and project teams in every article, not just biographies. It might be worth looking at all the articles on Wikipedia and removing all the external links there as well while you`re at it.Francis E Williams (talk) 10:43, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

I removed the link farm sprouting up from the External links section of the article. The External links section is not meant to be a parking lot for unused sources. Thus, please, place sources here (and follow the same practice with other biography articles). Placing them here allows a clean area allowing few exceptions, such as the artist's Official website, and maybe the site for their band, etc. Once you find that a source has been used to the fullest in the article, just cross it out, like this.

OH WOW- of all the "references" listed there, the only one that can be used as a reference is this one:

I have renamed the section in dispute, this section was edited to the bottom of the article (when it was reviewed by the project team). I have changed it to Copyright free music samples to appease the above comments made by another contributor/editor. These are not "references", never were references, but music "samples". Proper research would have revealed that this is fact. References are normally inserted into the article text, and should appear in the "references" section. That is what the encyclopedia should be based on, and usually is based on - indepth research of the subject matter.Francis E Williams (talk) 13:28, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable references

[edit]

Never use links to or from fan sites, blogs, or You Tube performances. For one thing, none of them qualify to be used anywhere in the article as sources. The first two often violate the rules regarding NPOV, since fans and bloggers have their own preferences or dislikes of who they write about. The videos are problematic, in part because of POV issues, but primarily since linking to outside sites is a copyright violation in many cases, and like the above situations, can be pulled leaving dead links for us here, you got to be really careful, please. See WP:RELY --Leahtwosaints (talk) 01:51, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Having been the "culprit" in adding non-copyright, historical (some 6 years old), public, free to record performances, non-copyrighted, "musical" links for the specific purpose of introducing the reader to the sound and style of the artist. I am also the "culprit" who has spent many days to bring it into shape and maintain neutrality in content for this article, and avoided any link that could be considered "self-promotion" or "fan" based origin, I don`t think it is useful to contributors to be treated as morons with repeated warnings all over the talk page. Some articles even have links to the subjects website! that can`t be right either! where is the consitency in editorial comment on Wikipedia? Revert the article to its original awful state or tag it speedy deletion, I couldn`t care either way.Francis E Williams (talk) 11:06, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. A very real possibility , Wikipedia itself could be pulled at anytime in the future, in what context is an internet based encylopedia rated as a suitable contribution to the British Reference library, or a valuable historic document in any library?. Who is going to print it all out, and at what point in its evolution?Francis E Williams (talk) 14:14, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Johnny Kalsi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:03, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:40, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Johnny_Kalsi&oldid=1207899809"