| Revision as of 17:25, 8 September 2012 editMichig (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators70,062 edits →Edit warring: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:46, 8 September 2012 edit undoGimmetoo (talk | contribs)14,302 edits →Logos: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
| To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's ] to work toward making a version that represents ] among editors. See ] for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant ] or seek ]. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary ]. <!-- Template:uw-3rr -->--] (]) 17:25, 8 September 2012 (UTC) | To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's ] to work toward making a version that represents ] among editors. See ] for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant ] or seek ]. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary ]. <!-- Template:uw-3rr -->--] (]) 17:25, 8 September 2012 (UTC) | ||
| == Logos == | |||
| Apparently you are adding a number of logos in the name field of instances of {{tl|infobox musical artist}}. As you can see from the template documentation, "Logos and other graphics are to be avoided in this field". A logo, if it accurately reflects a graphic used by a group, is copyrighted or trademarked, and thus should have some sort of commentary to "justify" a minimal fair use. The notion of "identification" was discussed some years back. Most editors considered corporations mainly identified by the logo (rather than the CEO or people who run them), while bands were considered mainly identified by the people who make them up. Thus we do use a picture of a band in the info box, but not a logo, even in cases like ] or ] where there is a fairly well-known identifying logo which is later discussed in the text. So please, stop putting logos in the name field. If you are aware of significant commentary on a logo, then put a paragraph in the main text. Thanks. ] (]) 19:46, 8 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 19:46, 8 September 2012
As much as I hope that there are no problems with my edits, there sometimes are. If so, don't hesitate to tell me about them here. Alternatively, it's always nice to hear that someone likes your work, either way, leave any feedback at all! :-)
Triple H Retirement
Hey - just thought I'd point out that although Triple H's retirement looks likely, there's been no actual concrete proof that he's retired from in-ring performing. Even the interview linked to in the article says that he's seemingly retired. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.219.180.88 (talk) 22:02, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
Edit warring
Your recent editing history at Eminem shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. --Michig (talk) 17:25, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
Logos
Apparently you are adding a number of logos in the name field of instances of {{infobox musical artist}}. As you can see from the template documentation, "Logos and other graphics are to be avoided in this field". A logo, if it accurately reflects a graphic used by a group, is copyrighted or trademarked, and thus should have some sort of commentary to "justify" a minimal fair use. The notion of "identification" was discussed some years back. Most editors considered corporations mainly identified by the logo (rather than the CEO or people who run them), while bands were considered mainly identified by the people who make them up. Thus we do use a picture of a band in the info box, but not a logo, even in cases like Nine Inch Nails or Ramones where there is a fairly well-known identifying logo which is later discussed in the text. So please, stop putting logos in the name field. If you are aware of significant commentary on a logo, then put a paragraph in the main text. Thanks. Gimmetoo (talk) 19:46, 8 September 2012 (UTC)