Hotcop2 Archives

Archive 1

I agree with you completely I think but we need to change every album that comes after it because Tug of War is apparently his "fourth" when it is really his third. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GHDmnespafro (talk • contribs) 19:26, 30 September 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you keep saying that McCartney II is McCartney's second solo album that it will completely be out of sync with Tug of War which is credited as his fourth album. So if you want to change all that, I'm not doing it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GHDmnespafro (talk • contribs) 16:25, 30 September 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can you share your info you have on the New Village People with Victor Willis, I haven't seen any posts with regards to Edward Lopes leaving and Sonny Earl taking his place or with regards to Josh Cartier being replaced by J. J. Lippold. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.104.175.210 (talk) 23:25, 17 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I also have ties to the Veepers. Before Hodo, Jones and Hughes (i.e. San Francisco video) there were other members. The photo from 1978 is the most notable lineup. Hotcop2 (talk) 21:54, 10 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also you really shouldn't list Bill Whitefield, Alex Timmerman, and Angel (Morales) as "Former Members" in the table at the top of the page. They have never been recognized by Can't Stop or Sixuvus, Ltd. as "members," and were hired only to fill-in if a member was sick or injured. You are correct to list Angel as standing-in for Felipe for a few shows and that's how Bill Whitefield and Alex Timmerman should be listed as well, "Construction Worker 2002 and 2003" and "G.I. 2004" is incorrect. BikerFan22 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.82.121.85 (talk) 21:25, 10 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Will do, but I'm curious, do you work for Wikipedia? I have a close business relation with the Village People and assure you that I have spoken with their management about making this change. Thanks...be well-BikerFan22 —Preceding undated comment added 20:19, 10 June 2010 (UTC).Reply[reply]

Hey, Hotcop2...curious why you keep undoing my Village People edits? —Preceding unsigned comment added by BikerFan22 (talk • contribs) 19:55, 10 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cutting some slack! :D You seem to be close to the band, will you find out more on the Live At The Greek Theater release that seems to be delayed. Depshiit Patel (talk) 00:35, 24 October 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you kind sir. :-) The live album will come out eventually. I never pay attention to excited posts on Facebook in terms of timetables. It should say "eventually" on all FB posts because they've always been off... sometimes by years. Hotcop2 (talk) 00:44, 24 October 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hopefully the vintage recordings of live shows and demos/outtakes will come out sooner than later. Us Village People fans are getting up there in age. I remember the Don Kirshner live concert that had Bittersweet bring back in 1978.

Your attempt to archive your talk page made it end up in the main namespace. I've taken the liberty of undoing that and properly archiving it. Hope that's allright with you. Lupo 22:29, 17 December 2007 (UTC)Depshiit Patel (talk) 03:16, 24 October 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you. I admit I'm an imbecile at this Wiki stuff, but one can't know everything, can one? ;-) I appreciate it. Hotcop2 (talk) 23:17, 17 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dude, did something I do screw up your page? Your entire history is, like gone. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 23:25, 17 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Perhaps I'm just a figment of Wikination. Probably something I did screwed it up, but what the hay. Well, at least we're here now. Hotcop2 (talk) 23:34, 17 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The history of this page is not "gone", it's over at User talk:Hotcop2/Archive 1. That's normal when a talk page gets archived using a move. Lupo 06:59, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This account has been blocked for 48 hours as a probable sockpuppet of Sixstring1965 (talk · contribs). A checkuser will be requested. This account has a history of image copyright violations and biography of living person editing that is a serious cause for concern. See also Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Mister ricochet. - Jehochman ^Talk 00:07, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Update: I have decided to unblock this account and wait for the checkuser results, just in case this is an innocent user who has unknowingly been involved in the editing pattern of a banned user. Please be careful to follow Wikipedia's image use policy, and to follow biography of living persons policy. - Jehochman ^Talk 00:33, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hotcop2, if you need help with the image uploads, I will do my best to help you fix them. Please post any questions here or on my talk page. - Jehochman ^Talk 01:03, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi J -- I am blocked from your page, so I'll have to ask you here. I had previously uploaded a photo of May Pang with John Lennon, which I received from Ms. Pang to put on Wiki. I didn't take that photo, but I thought it was the best for her page. When the great "deletion" tag was put on it (because, I suspect it was originally uploaded by Sixstring) I removed it myself and put up a photo that I took of her, which isn't quite as interesting, but I figure would have no problem since it was mine -- and throught I tagged correctly. Same on the Dave Winfield page -- this is a photo I took, I uploaded and thought I tagged correct for Wiki to use.

As for Victor Willis, I work with him as well and got all the permissions and sent them everywhere, but it too was called for deletion because Sixsting originally uploaded it for me. R Baley is handling that one for me, having made direct contact and getting it tagged correctly.

So, now I have my two photos of Pang and Winfield that I'd like to share with Wiki and give full consent and all the tags but obviously I'm still doing something wrong. If you could tell me how to do it, I'd be grateful. Hotcop2 (talk) 01:14, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

First, I will remove the deletion tags on the assumption that the situation is as you say. We need to get somebody with more expertise on images to help explain how to document the situation correctly. I think you should perhaps re-upload the photos and select "own work" and choose a free license. Be sure not to put © in the description as that is a red flag, assuming of course that you own the copyright yourself. You should now be able to post to any Wikipedia page as you are unblocked. - Jehochman ^Talk 01:18, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you. Like I said, I thought I hit all the right tags. I only put the copyrightin because I was trying to show it was mine and Wiki can have it. No good deed goes punished, i guess :-) Hotcop2 (talk) 01:21, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can you edit those image pages to remove the copyright notice? That will help. I am very sorry for any trouble. - Jehochman ^Talk 01:24, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, please don't. The © is not a red flag! Keep it. The red flag in this case was a combination of several things:

• Re-upload of images previously deleted as copyvios, and that were previously uploaded by this Sixstring character, with dubious, differing, and invalid license claims.
• Claims of permissions, but no OTRS ticket number on the image description pages.
• A permission that turned out to be "wikipedia-only", for use in a particular article (the Bob Gruen photo of John Lennon), which naturally raised suspicions that the permissions for the other images might be equally restricted. (E. g. the permission for commons:Image:Victor Willis.jpg is apparently not good enough.)

But the © has nothing to do with it. Images licensed under a free license are still copyrighted, so placing both a © and a free license is perfectly ok. However, Wikipedia accepts only images under free licenses (GFDL, CC-BY, CC-BY-SA, or placed into the public domain by the author, or equivalent). If there are any conditions attached (no derivatives, no commercial uses, use only on wikipedia or only in a specific article, don't copy to commons, etc.), then the image is not free and may be used at the utmost under a "fair use" claim here at the English Wikipedia.

If you've got a permission from someone to license their image under a free license, forward this permission to permissions-en@wikimedia.org or to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org, if the original upload of the image is at the commons. Mention the fact that a permission has been forwarded on the image page (at the commons, one can use the template "OTRS pending" to do so). Sometimes, OTRS has a large backlog. Lupo 10:31, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re:". . .the permission for commons:Image:Victor Willis.jpg is apparently not good enough." The Declaration of Consent form (which I sent) was modified from the original, in an incompatible way. R. Baley (talk) 10:54, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The checkuser result came back "unrelated". If you like, I can add a note to your block log to say that the block was an error. This may help prevent future issues. - Jehochman ^Talk 01:23, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks again. Whatever you think will keep me from having this monthly stroke.  ;-) Hotcop2 (talk) 01:24, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lol. that seems like a great idea, Jhochman. As well, you could take it in stride and create a userbox that stipulates that you are not a sock of SixString1965. :) - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 01:28, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done. I will think about what else I can do to help you. - Jehochman ^Talk 01:29, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for being speedy and keeping an open mind, J. R. Baley (talk) 01:31, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Btw, the Victor Willis photo has been uploaded to Commons (link), but I'm still waiting for someone from OTRS to add the ticket number. R. Baley (talk) 01:37, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you everyone. I'm not Rappaport, nor Sixstring ;-) Hotcop2 (talk) 01:40, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah, and don't you forget it! :) --andreasegde (talk) 09:39, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Don't forget about me, too, Andreasegde. ;-) Had the same problem meself, with that bugger Sixstring. He's a real...for the sake of decency, I won't say it. "Something involving genatalia and shoe polish", a quote from a decent movie. :) Kodster (Willis) (Look what I can do) 23:07, 1 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

After the Lennon aticle has got a GA (should take a couple of weeks) it would be nice to get May's article up to GA. This is funny, but she's probably the only article I would actually like to work on, because she seems so positive. (Doing the Fabs and their families/assistants has not been easy, as there were a lot of painful things one has to read and then put in... ) --andreasegde (talk) 09:39, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

BTW, it has been interesting to read how difficult it is to actually upload a photograph that has been released/allowed to be used. Wiki keeps deleting fair-use images, but makes it difficult when a person actually has clearance. (Maybe it happens so seldom that they can hardly believe it!) --andreasegde (talk) 14:56, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Arcayne and I totally redid the May article, which was nothing more than a slanderizing book review. I'll be happy to work with you on improving it. Hotcop2 (talk) 16:32, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm still blocked until tomorrow, so I'll add some "citations" when the block is lifted. Hotcop2 (talk) 22:03, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's a disgrace. Anybody with half a brain should be able to see the massive difference in the writing style between you and the others (which always proves the point). I am looking forward to working on May's article. --Sherlock Watson and his friend, Mr. Holmes (talk) 02:32, 20 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you A. I kinda thought that was the most insulting part too LOL. Hotcop2 (talk) 02:36, 20 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I totally missed this latest drama - sorry I wasn't here to lend my testimony in support, Hot. Tvoz |talk 06:02, 20 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Life's too short. Consider it a blessing ;-) We know you were there in spirit. Hotcop2 (talk) 17:17, 20 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is good. I worked on McCartney's with two or three other editors, and I had a great time. Since then I have been skulking in articles about various Beatles' relations and assistants on my lonesome. It's good to be back in the land of the living. :) --andreasegde (talk) 20:00, 20 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tis the season. Hotcop2 (talk) 20:02, 20 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Don't overdose on cranberry sauce or cookies!

Spread the Holiday cheer by adding ((subst:User:Arcayne/ECard)) to their talk page with a friendly message.

- Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 16:23, 23 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Awwww. Wish I knew how to do that ;-) Same to, yours and everyone's. Hotcop2 (talk) 16:49, 23 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sixstring1965 (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting promotes WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Don't overdose on cranberry sauce or cookies!

Right now I have activated it so you can mail me. I have no special knowledge about John Lennon except that I have read some of his biographies - of them I enjoyed the most a memoir book by Fred Seaman called The Last Days of John Lennon. So then I am not great fan of Yoko's friends such Sam Havadtoy and Sam Green and all those Yoko's fortune tellers. I also don't feel that Elliot Mintz tells the whole truth about John Lennon. --Bluewind (talk) 10:35, 29 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are you on this photo? :) --andreasegde (talk) 21:39, 11 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, but I took the first photo on the left of May, Nancy Andrews, Chris O'Dell and Pattie Boyd Harrison Clapton ;-) Hotcop2 (talk) 22:32, 11 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I took out the old one and uploaded and put in the new one. You know which one I'm talking about, so I won't say which one is the one I've done. If anyone else reads this and understands what I'm on about, they'll get 10 points and a gold star. :) --andreasegde (talk) 03:30, 13 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

BTW, Is that you, or was it someone else that sent me the mail? --andreasegde (talk) 07:04, 13 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah, it's me. I think someone else will know what you're talking about because it wasn't accidentally put there lol. Hotcop2 (talk) 14:24, 13 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Hotcop, I was wondering if there was going to be anything further with respect to the Victor Willis image uploaded at commons? It still has insufficient permission to use. . .feel free to email me if you want. Thanks, R. Baley (talk) 17:55, 14 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Great to see you back, and (hopefully) feeling well. Good work on the references for John (some of the language makes me feel a bit uneasy, though). I am waiting for a GA review for May. I know it's weird to refer to May as "Pang" all the time, but that's how the cookie crumbles, as you might say. :) --andreasegde (talk) 19:07, 19 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks A. Still not feeling well, but the wiki must go on ;-) Hotcop2 (talk) 22:43, 19 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am a member of the Beatles WikiProject, and would like the newsletter. How do I get it? Basketball110 22:54, 19 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I never heard of the newsletter. Ask Andrea... and when you find out, please let me know ;-) Hotcop2 (talk) 22:56, 19 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It was stopped quite awhile ago. A pity, but there you go. Maybe it could be restarted? Ask kingboyk ('cos he's the man to talk to). --andreasegde (talk) 18:47, 21 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Leave a note on this page. --andreasegde (talk) 18:51, 21 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

BTW, it's Andreas/Andrew/Egde/the boring one, Hotcop... :)) --andreasegde (talk) 19:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

She now has a GA review. There are not many problems, and I am sure that she will pass, with a little bit of work. :) --andreasegde (talk) 18:47, 21 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

sounds like a mission ;-) hopefully i'll get myself in gear soon and tackle JL Hotcop2 (talk) 22:32, 21 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am starting on May now (I hope she doesn't mind me saying that :) Thanks for the book references. --andreasegde (talk) 15:33, 22 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have cleaned it as much as I can, and I think it reads well, and will soon get a GA rating. (I don't really know why I do these GA articles, because they're so demanding - it's the adrenalin...)--andreasegde (talk) 17:04, 22 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have totally cleaned May's article, and I expect a reply from the reviewer soon. --andreasegde (talk) 17:39, 23 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Looks great A. This is the only thing that's made me feel better lol. Hotcop2 (talk) 23:12, 23 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm a poet but I don't know it, so here we go... May, is now a GA, best regards from A. --andreasegde (talk) 16:03, 24 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

you're a laureate and a scholar, a ;-) Hotcop2 (talk) 22:03, 24 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:VPHits.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 00:56, 14 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:VPHits.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Melesse (talk) 02:29, 14 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I said I couldn't do do it, but nobody wanted wanted to help. Hotcop2 (talk) 15:42, 14 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:VPHits.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:13, 16 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have no other unlicensed photos. Hotcop2 (talk) 15:49, 16 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

When he gets his GA, you will get the Barnstar. BTW, you will be only the second person (after 'Kodster', recently) since September 2006 (McCartney) to take a Beatles' article through a GA. (The other person inbetween shall remain nameless...:) But... (as always) I have to make some points (don't worry, it's all positive)

• It's good enough as it is to get a GA - don't worry about putting more in - it's polishing time. They're only bothered about the major points of his life, not minor details. They jump on the minor details like below:
• There are enough references, but we probably missed one or two here or there.
• Format dates: "on March 20, 1969", as 20 March 1969. One or two need doing, but not years by themselves; 1972 should be 1972.
• Format references (books and internet) so they look all the same. This is boring work, but it has to be done, as it will be noticed. (I will help as well.)
• Watch out for POV like "the best album they ever made", or anything remotely similar, as this will be noticed as well.
• When someone reviews it, don't get into a talking match about whether you agree or disagree, just do it - it can be changed (as a style issue) later.
• Which kind of Barnstar would you like? :)

PS, Good stuff defending May. They really do want to whitewash her, don't they? Scaredy-cats, who are all afraid of Miss Ono, no doubt. Have fun.--andreasegde (talk) 18:51, 22 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I enjoy working with you (especially on the GAs) so if you ever need me to look something "Beatle" over, let me know. I don't know what a barnstar is, duh, so I leave it up to you ;-) Hotcop2 (talk) 19:11, 22 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		I very gladly give this Barnstar to Hotcop2, because she has worked really hard (despite her own personal physical pain, but she ignored it anyway and still carried on). In my opinion, "Above and Beyond the Call of Duty" for her work on the May Pang (GA) and John Lennon (GA) articles is the correct thing to say. She is to be truly respected.--andreasegde (talk) 00:41, 23 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Beatles editor, Dendodge, wants to start sending out The Beatles Newsletter again. If you would like to receive it, please leave a message on this page. All the best, --andreasegde (talk) 17:27, 1 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy Beatles Day! Just a message from the Beatles WikiProject! Have a great day, Hotcop2!

...... Densock .. Talk^{(Dendodge on a public network)} 11:26, 10 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter Issue 013 – July 2008
Beatles News A nine-minute interview with Paul McCartney and John Lennon has surfaced that had been lost since 30 April 1964, after they returned from their first American tour. Paul Weller played an unexpected cover of The Beatles' "All You Need Is Love" during a gig being staged as part of London's iTunes Festival. "Beatles Day – Imagine The Concert" will be a part of this year’s Summer Pops Festival. Prime Minister Gordon Brown has revealed his favourite Beatles song - "All My Loving" - because he played it on the piano as a young upstart. McCartney and Starr will be among the stars to honour Sir George Martin at USC Representatives for The Beatles, Activision Inc. (NASDAQ: ATVI), and MTV Games are in talks about developing a Beatles-themed video game versions of Guitar Hero (series) and Rock Band (video game). McCartney talked about his last moments with Harrison, just days before his death. Rare photos of The Beatles are to go on display in Little Chalfont next week. Yoko Ono plans to appeal a failed lawsuit against a filmmaker who used a piece of footage from the Imagine (film) without permission. US District Judge Sidney Stein found in favour of the filmmakers based on Fair use. (Interesting for Wikipedia editors...) Ringo Starr's new album, Liverpool 8, only sold 7,000 copies in its first week of release. Project News As you may have seen, the talk page banner changed a bit. It has a couple of bugs (most notably the categorisation problems), but the ((WPBannerMeta)) standardisation was long overdue. Thank you to Dendodge for sorting it. The newsletter's back after a very positive reaction, and thanks are again due to Dendodge. Article adoptions: Heather Mills will be a hot topic next month, as the truth will be referenced. The hottest Project page this month has been The Quarrymen (now a GA). It reveals the most accurate history of their early days, because so many other web pages tell a completely untrue story (one web page said they lost a Carroll Levis competition to a woman who played the spoons :) Other Project news The project now has 5 FA articles, and 33 GA articles. George Harrison, Ringo Starr, and Klaus Voormann are still B-class articles, as is Yoko Ono (will she ever get a GA rating?) Member News New members to the project (since the last issue, which was a long time ago) include a lot of names, which can be found here.... Project member news:	Issue of the Month Apart from the usual vandals, there is an ongoing problem with Wikipedia editors deleting free and fair-use photos because they don't think they are of any value to articles, even though this sometimes leaves articles with no photos at all. These editors do not leave notes on talk pages, so if you see that a photo has vanished, check the talk page and the history log. From the Editors It's been a while, but the newsletter's back! After a short discussion on the project talk page, seemingly unanimous consensus to bring it back was reached. This issue, and subsequent ones, will probably be shorter - as we kept running out of things to say before! There's a lot to say this month, purely due to the long absence of a newsletter, but we'll keep it as brief as possible. In order to get delivery by Denbot sorted, the special delivery interface has been changed slightly - but existing delivery options still stand. Inactive participants who want delivery should place their names on this list. If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy! Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 014 – August 2008). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing! Contributors to this Issue Dendodge (Lead Editor & Distributor) andreasegde (Gossip and lie-detector editor)
Complete To Do List Make visible or invisible by clicking Show or Hide, respectively. To-do list for User:Hotcop2: A list of articles needing cleanup associated with this project is available. See also the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects. Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Articles on each Beatle tour (Category:The Beatles concert tours). See: Missing articles. Expand : The Lost Lennon Tapes, notable radio series which has spawned many bootlegs. Apple Records See also: Adopt an article Stubs : See: Category:The Beatles song stubs Update : Pics/Graphics wanted: Kenwood. Verify : Beatle wives Other : Project: Add ((WikiProject The Beatles)) to the talk pages of all Beatles-related articles. Send a newsletter to members, canvas for new members and coordinate tasks. Enter articles assessed as stubs onto this list, also list articles needing cleanup and other work here. If you complete one of these tasks, please remove it from the list and add your achievement to the project log.

Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

((../Issue-nav|013))...... Densock .. Talk^{(Dendodge on a public network)} 11:43, 22 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes folks, it’s the The time again. You might like to add your opinion (whatever it may be) on this page.--andreasegde (talk) 14:50, 10 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Could you confirm that you took this image? Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:49, 26 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

((../Issue-nav|016))

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter Issue 016 – November 2008
Beatles News Bob Dylan and The Beatles: Even geniuses can have an off day - Paul McCartney unearths Carnival of Light, a lost Beatles recording. Malcolm Gladwell on Joy, Gates and the Beatles -- and on stage - Malcolm Gladwell praises The Beatles and discusses how they honed their talents in Hamburg. Beatles' 'Eleanor Rigby''s identity revealed? - Paul McCartney reveals the inspiration for his song, Eleanor Rigby. Project News We now have a barnstar - it can be placed on anybody's talk page using ((subst:Beatles barnstar|Message. ~~~~)) A peer review for George Harrison has been opened by Dendodge in an attempt to get both it and Ringo Starr to good article status, in order to get The Beatles personnel to good topic status. A portal peer review has been opened for The Beatles portal in order to get it to featured portal status. It will gain the distinction of being the first portal dedicated to an individual musician/band to reach featured status. 0 new articles have been listed in the Project Log since 1 October. The project log seems to have been neglected recently, and we request that project members help us to bring it up-to-date. Member News New members to the project since the last issue include QuidProQuo23 and Feeling free. Tj999 has changed his name to TFunk.	Issue of the Month History of The Beatles has been recreated following the advice given in a peer review of The Beatles. We request your assistance in summarising the History section of The Beatles so they are not just carbon copies of each other. From the Editor Please take the time to review some articles (or submit your own) at our internal peer review page. It will help us to improve our articles. If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy! Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 017 – December 2008). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing! Contributors to this Issue Dendodge (Editor, Distributor)
Complete To Do List Make visible or invisible by clicking Show or Hide, respectively. To-do list for User:Hotcop2: A list of articles needing cleanup associated with this project is available. See also the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects. Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Articles on each Beatle tour (Category:The Beatles concert tours). See: Missing articles. Expand : The Lost Lennon Tapes, notable radio series which has spawned many bootlegs. Apple Records See also: Adopt an article Stubs : See: Category:The Beatles song stubs Update : Pics/Graphics wanted: Kenwood. Verify : Beatle wives Other : Project: Add ((WikiProject The Beatles)) to the talk pages of all Beatles-related articles. Send a newsletter to members, canvas for new members and coordinate tasks. Enter articles assessed as stubs onto this list, also list articles needing cleanup and other work here. If you complete one of these tasks, please remove it from the list and add your achievement to the project log.

Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

((../Issue-nav|016)) Denbot (talk) 17:38, 19 November 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nitpicking is an opinion of yours and is not a valid reason. Chasesboys (talk) 23:12, 5 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cultural icon and critically acclaimed albums are not nit picking, they are valuable information to be in the intro when it is supposed to be an overall outline. Chasesboys (talk) 23:51, 5 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Everything's valuable information. Let's make the Lennon article one long intro. Hotcop2 (talk) 23:55, 5 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Come on now, If the Elvis Article can state cultural icon, so can the Lennon article, What hurt does it do to say he realeased the critically acclaimed albums? It gives information about Double Fantasy, so why not PlasticOnoBand or Imagine, which are arguably more popular? Chasesboys (talk) 00:14, 6 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I kept Double Fantasy in the intro because it won the Grammy (which it would not have if he hadn't been killed) and it was his last record and associated with his death. It's true that both POB and Imagine were critically acclaimed (and, at the time, Double Fantasy was universally panned) but you may or may not have been around for the "songs addition" debate to the intro (everyone adding their favorite Lennon song; I believe we've reached a consensus that despite all his great songs, the global impact of "Imagine" and "Give Peace" cannot be matched by "Instant Karma" or "Tight Ass" -- I'm just trying to keep what is supposed to be an *overview* of an incredible, diverse career from getting bogged down. I did like your suggestion to remove the family/sons bit from the intro, which I did. I don't want to crowd this article up so much that it becomes tedious to read. That includes the inclusion of the not-yet made movie "Nowhere Boy" -- there are over 20 movies about Lennon (and Imagine #2 which was technically "by" him) but since we don't (and shouldn't) list them all, we're not going to start with that one. I know you weren't the one who put in the movie info.

Lennon was named "an icon of the 20th Century" (which is more impressive than "a cultural icon"), but I can't find the reference for it just yet. Hotcop2 (talk) 00:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I do believe that Give Peace A Chance and Imagine should be the only songs, although Instant Karma would be a good addition, but I really do think that POB and Imagine should be mentioned in the intro as two of his most successful albums, because they in fact were, POB being the 22nd greatest album of all time for christ sakes. I can live without the Cultural icon, but POB and Imagine should be in the intro, because just naming Double Fantasy makes it seem like that is his best album, when it was in fact not even close. Chasesboys (talk) 01:22, 6 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re this, I assumed that an American interview would use US spelling, but since I don't have the original source, from which we are supposed to render quotes verbatim, I cannot tell. Any ideas here? Rodhullandemu 00:03, 3 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think we should keep it consistent with the UK spelling... we're not altering the quote. If we keep the US spelling because it was done in the US, we'd have to change everything from 1971-80 because he was here ;-) Hotcop2 (talk) 18:07, 3 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We are holding a straw poll (in a very friendly way, of course) to decide if The Beatles should be called a group, or a band. You can add your user signature to one or the other by clicking this link, Group or band – which one?. Thanks.--andreasegde (talk) 23:50, 19 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am a fan of Lennon's "Fat Elvis" quote, but I didn't want to revert you and I agree we don't need two mentions of his 1965 weight gain. Got any objection to restoring the quote somewhere near the remaining mention of his 1965 weight? — John Cardinal (talk) 21:38, 29 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lennon, by his own account, "retired" in 1975 after Sean was born. There is no reason to edit war over this; provide a reference and all is well. Radiopathy •talk• 06:35, 7 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lennon said in 1980 that he decided to take 5 years off. But he hadn't decided to until 1977 and I did provide the reference to the Ringo Starr recording session in 1976. I even emailed you, and you didn't respond. He recorded in 1976, despite what he said in interviews. Hotcop2 (talk) 14:13, 7 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Provide a ref where Lennon says he retired in any year other than 1975. I don't understand why you keep bringing up the 1976 Ringo sessions; that has nothing to do with Lennon being out of the public eye from 1975-1980.

Please stop the edit warring. Radiopathy •talk• 17:31, 7 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

He was not out of the public eye in 1975 -- he released two albums in 1975 and also did the Bowie "Fame" thing in 1975 and made two videos, "Slippin N Slidin" and "Stand By Me" in 1975 and did the Lew Grade concert in 1975, plus the immigration thing happen in 1975 it's safe to assume he was still active in 1975. In 1976, he was in court for the rock n roll album, then did the ringo sessions. In 1977, he went to Japan with Yoko to show her family Sean and said to the NME that he's taking time off to be with the family. Then in 1980 he said he took 5 years off, altho he didn't. He said a few things that weren't exactly correct in his lifetime, but that's neither here or there. Again, I emailed you privately and you didn't answer. I'm not debating here anymore. Hotcop2 (talk) 18:20, 7 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You got TWO references now citing 1977 from Lennon's mouth in Japan. Hotcop2 (talk) 18:41, 7 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are debating me here; you don't communicate off-wiki about a content dispute. I'm well aware of Lennon's activities through 1975 - but you have yet to provide a reliable source for your assertion. If you continue edit warring over this, an admin will be asked to intervene. Radiopathy •talk• 20:40, 7 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

He recorded in 1976; therefore he was active in 1976. Harrison took some time off the in 80s -- why don't don't you correct that in the meantime? Hotcop2 (talk) 20:52, 7 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on John Lennon. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Radiopathy •talk• 20:28, 7 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Interesting statement you made on my talk page. Is that a threat, or a challenge or a promise maybe? If it's because I'm calling you on your bullshit idea that this is your own personal Wikipedia, don't wish me luck. If you continue to disrupt the project to pursue ownership rights to any article you desire, you will be dealt with appropriately. Radiopathy •talk• 01:08, 13 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

that was in reference to the other champ's comment. you really need to develop a sense of humor. Hotcop2 (talk) 02:15, 13 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on The Beatles (album). Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. freshacconci talktalk 12:39, 15 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a short time in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy to prevent further disruption caused by your engagement in an edit war at The Beatles (album). During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text ((unblock|your reason here)) below. Toddst1 (talk) 13:45, 15 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And in the end... the facts I laid is equal to the block you made. Hotcop2 (talk) 12:35, 17 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I fully support Hotcop2 in this. It is nothing short of bullying, and leaves a very sour taste...--andreasegde (talk) 11:49, 27 September 2009 (UTC).Reply[reply]

Thanks A. Well, I see one down. I'm not insane afterall (well, maybe just a little...)Hotcop2 (talk) 16:53, 5 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:May Pang 2002.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:May Pang 2002.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:May Pang 2002.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:50, 7 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Maybe this could be of some use: May Pangs Dinner Specials radio show. (BTW, don't let the b#st#rds grind you down. Hope you're keeping well). :)--andreasegde (talk) 06:12, 27 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. I didn't quite realise that "John Lennon: the life" by Philip Norman was so poorly received that you removed the addition of it in the John Lennon article. Your comment was "of the 100's of books written about him, why highlight an author who both Ono and McCartney denounced?".

- *Norman, Philip, John Lennon : the life, 1st ed., New York : Ecco, 2008. ISBN 9780060754013.
- * Norman, Philip, Days in the life : John Lennon remembered, London : Century, 1990. ISBN 0712639225

For example, The Independent in London just about had given it a rave review?

John Lennon: The Life, By Philip Norman
Reviewed by Simon O'Hagan
The Independent (London)
Friday, 3 October 2008
" ... As the author of what is widely regarded as the best "straight" Beatles biography – Shout!, published in 1981 – Norman set about his Lennon project five years ago with impeccable credentials. If anything, the result is even more impressive than one might have hoped for. This will surely come to be regarded as the definitive portrait of the Beatle who, to a much greater extent than his three band-mates, needed to be helped down from his pedestal. Norman carries out the task with a kind of quiet heroism. ..." And concludes " ... Norman says he set out to write a biography not of 'a pop person, but of a major, towering presence in his century'. He has triumphed resoundingly. ..."

And the Observer wrote:

Rock from a hard place
Sean O'Hagan
The Observer, Sunday 5 October 2008
" ... This is the best life of Lennon to date, however, if only for its brilliant evocation of his childhood in postwar England, that repressed and essentially Victorian society that shaped him and that he, more than any other British pop star, helped tear down."

Although the Telegraph wrote in 2008:

John Lennon: The Life by Philip Norman review
by Christopher Bray
Published: 12:01AM BST 23 Oct 2008
" ... Does that mean this is the all-elucidating book of revelations? Alas, no. There is little here that is new. ..."

And there are others.

Is this book to be censored from this Wikipedia article since it's controversial?

Eh? Best Wishes. --- Wikiklrsc (talk) 01:03, 16 December 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There are plenty of factual errors in his (or yours, if you're Philip) book, things that don't even add up mathematically. It's thorough in his Beatle years, but falls way short in the later years. Aside from "John might've like Paul sexually", there's nothing in the book that's new or enlightening. We don't list any of the other 100s of books in the article, why those two? And to start a section for it? Hotcop2 (talk) 02:09, 16 December 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm not Philip. Thanks. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc (talk) 15:21, 16 December 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

First time anyone's told me I don't need a citation. Thanks. Dkreisst (talk) 21:44, 17 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

LOL. Well, in '77 he was an indian chief (as in cowboys &) but native american is correct and p.c. to boot. Hotcop2 (talk) 21:48, 17 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey HotCop2, I was thinking it would be nice if we can clean up VP page with the long list of former members and make a separate page. I am still new and getting my feet wet here. Do you know what I mean? Check out Guns N' Roses wiki page and the top where there is current members but under it says See List of Guns 'n Roses Band Members. I think there could be a good spot to move all the info about various line ups and then on that page we can put members of all past & present. I am going to work on a draft but would enjoy your overlooking if that works for you? Depshiit Patel (talk) 07:16, 5 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sure, if you wanna go thru all that I'll take a look. Sounds like a lot to do lol.Hotcop2 (talk) 14:43, 5 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for this; you made me laugh. (I am old enough to have vivid memories of the day that the original deal was announced--like most people I thought Winfield's contract was outrageous--but I left the country almost at the same time and had never heard until now about George's "discovery".) Awesome. 98.82.23.93 (talk) 23:21, 22 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My pleasure ;-) Hotcop2 (talk) 23:30, 22 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Did you meet May Pang and took her picture for Wikipedia? Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 22:38, 1 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm not famous lol. I just like articles to include photos when possible, so I take photos for articles I'm interested in. Hotcop2 (talk) 22:53, 1 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You met May Pang and took her picture? ! Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 01:11, 2 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hot! How've you been - we haven't been in touch in a long, long time (like maybe in 2007, about a Labor Day bbq - remember?). I need some help on John Lennon and I was delighted to see that you're still in there pitching for the cause....

Here's the thing: I've been looking for the source of a great quote from Lennon about "How Do You Sleep?" which I tracked down through page history to you - you added it in March 2009, and the source was shown as the Playboy interview, at that time linked to john-lennon.com. We've since changed the john-lennon.com link to the playboy.com link (see its page 2), due to concerns about copyright violation on john-lennon.com, and anyway Playboy's own link is better. But the thing is, this specific quote is not there. And it's not in the john-lennon.com version either. The online publication of the interview has some of the words - "I was using my resentment toward Paul to create a song" - but not the rest of it, so either the transcript was changed which doesn't really make sense, or maybe you picked it up from some other place who erroneously credited it to the interview? Or might the paper magazine copy differ from the online? Or am I losing my mind?

I hate to remove that quote because it is a good one, but obviously we need the right sourcing - if it's in the paper copy of Playboy (I'm trying to locate a copy - do you have one?) then we can credit it that way, but we need something.

Any help you can give would be great.

Nice to be in touch again - feel free to email me if you prefer - my email has not changed, and it's also available through my userpage link. Cheers! Tvoz/talk 19:21, 12 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

hey back! it has been a while. i'll find the source for the quote, which i like as well. Hotcop2 (talk) 23:51, 12 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ok, it's the 1980 BBC interview with Andy Peebles. I'll go thru it to make certain, and then reference it. I used a ref from johnlennon.com? must've had anb off day ;-) Hotcop2 (talk) 23:58, 12 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

this is a juxtaposition of two rambling quotes (hence the ....) from the BBC interview with Andy Peebles, December 6, 1980. Transcribed on pg 83 in the Dell paperback "The Last Lennon Tapes" by John Lennon, Yoko Ono and Andy Peebles (ISBN 0-440-04903-2) -- I don't do references correctly so here's the info. also, i don't know about the "harry" stuff, but Lennon most certainly did say "Ain't That A Shame" was the first song he learned to play, from his mom. Hotcop2 (talk) 00:43, 13 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ha! Believe it or not, I just found it too and was coming here to take you off the hook! I found it through Google books, on page 44 of the original 1981 BBC edition. Thanks so much Hot! Tvoz/talk 03:30, 13 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Anytime. Can't wait for this "anniversary" to be over with; that article is never finished lol. Hotcop2 (talk) 23:06, 13 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You can say that again. And some of the helpful edits are incomprehensible, which just adds to the fun. It's not a perfect article, and I don't agree with all of the editing choices that were made along the way, but by and large I think it has been a pretty solid piece, packed with good stuff, and I wish people would turn their eager editing knives somewhere else, where it's more needed. But who cares what I think.... Hope things are going well for you! Cheers - see you around! Tvoz/talk 00:24, 14 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(I also sometimes want to tell some of these kids that I've been a first generation fan for almost 50 years - my friends and I went to the record store on our own speed - well, by bus, as we were a bit too young to drive - and bought our own copies of Meet the Beatles in 1964, and I remember the thrill each time a new album or single came out and we would buy them and practically wear out the grooves. My own kids have often commented about how amazing it must have been to anticipate a new Beatles album - I remember that well. It was. So spare me, please!) Tvoz/talk 00:46, 14 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on December 8, 2010. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 8, 2010. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article director, Raul654 (talk · contribs). If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbh®tch^{Talk ©} Happy Holidays 05:57, 4 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

John Lennon (1940–1980) was an English musician and singer-songwriter who achieved worldwide fame as one of the founding members of The Beatles. Lennon and Paul McCartney formed one of the most successful songwriting partnerships of the 20th century. Born and raised in Liverpool, Lennon's first band, The Quarrymen, evolved into The Beatles in 1960. As the group began to undergo the disintegration that led to their break-up at the end of that decade, Lennon launched a solo career that would span the next, punctuated by critically acclaimed albums, including John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band and Imagine, and iconic songs such as "Give Peace a Chance" and "Imagine". Lennon revealed a rebellious nature and acerbic wit, and he became controversial through his work as a peace activist. He moved to New York City in 1971, where his criticism of the Vietnam War resulted in a lengthy attempt by Richard Nixon's administration to deport him. His songs were adapted as anthems by the anti-war movement. He took a sabbatical from the music business in 1975 to devote time to his family but reemerged in 1980 with a comeback album, Double Fantasy, but was murdered three weeks after its release. (more...)

Yes folks, it's here again. Please look at this link [1] and leave your vote. I thank you.--andreasegde (talk) 08:07, 1 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Hotcop2. You have new messages at Tvoz's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

Tvoz/talk 16:12, 26 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

a question on my talk Tvoz/talk 16:40, 26 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You bet. Glad to do it. Let's see if it stays. Thanks for the note, it's appreciated. Regards, --Manway 05:05, 27 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How to sort it out quickly. Write to ip talkpage explaining that you can only go by what the reliable source says, warn them the next time they make an unsourced change, give them a final warning the next time, then report to AIV at the next transgression. If their edits can be linked to previously blocked accounts, so much the better. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:55, 28 April 2011 (UTC) ps. I have blocked the one you noted to Andreasegde.Reply[reply]

Thank you. Hotcop2 (talk) 23:02, 28 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Guess who is back - from a different location, but the exact same edits - is either traveling or has some way to disguise the location. I warned him, but have no expectation that he'll go away. Last time he was blocked he got abusive - I can hardly wait. Tvoz/talk 22:16, 15 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

LOL. Yes, I saw your cleanups (you beat me to the punch). It's scary that (most of them) come from educational institutions. Hotcop2 (talk) 22:47, 15 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't know what personal bias you have against the photo, but you clearly don't know it's historical significance. It was taken just weeks before his murder and was part of a collection of photos that was widely published in the New York Times, on the cover of People Magazine, etc. Regardless of whether you like it or not, Lennon & Ono certainly did by all published reports. Wikipedia is very fortunate to have just recently acquired it and it accompanies articles where there have been no other photos of the two of them together which even come close. So again, whatever personal problem you have with the photo, you really need to get over. The photo is historically important and needs to be used wherever it is relevant and contributes to the articles on either of these two subjects. X4n6 (talk) 12:00, 29 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK, I see you're on a Jack Mitchell photo kick, which is fine. Lennon took hundreds of photos in the 'weeks" before his death, and several on the day he died, which are far more important. Be that as it may, it doesn't add to or illustrate anything in the "Death of Lennon" article. Yesterday you had it in the Monday Night Football section, today in the Aftermath. Makes no sense. Hotcop2 (talk) 12:11, 29 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are you trying to provoke an edit war? Or do you just think you "own" this article? I don't know what you mean by a Jack Mitchell "kick" but the reality is that, YES - we just got approval to use these photos. So it would be stupid not to use them. You should actually be delighted, because they're certainly far better than anything else we've got here. The photo improves the article. More to the point, you didn't like the original placement of the photo, so after consideration, and in deference to your objection, I moved it to a more suitable location where you cannot question it's relevance. You could have done that yourself had you not chosen to simply delete it without even the courtesy of discussion. If you'd like to sensibly discuss this, fine. But do not think or act like you can unilaterally edit. X4n6 (talk) 12:30, 29 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The photo is irrelevant to the Death of John Lennon. I said it works perfectly where you put it in the Ono article. Not bad in The Dakota article. Even in the Lennon article. It's obtrusive and irrelevant in the Death of Lennon article. Hotcop2 (talk) 12:33, 29 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can you explain to me how you find the photo doesn't fit in Aftermath? The Monday Night Football section has problems that someone else has already mentioned. And I've already accepted your objection to putting it there are a reasonable one. But how do we not show the photo in Aftermath? If not, what exactly are we discussing the aftermath of? His death and their story. If it's irrelvant - which I don't believe it is, then so is the photo of Ono taking flowers. So is the drawing of the Dakota when there is already a photo of the Dakota. It's redundant. I say we err on the side of more, not less. X4n6 (talk) 12:45, 29 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It doesn't fit in the aftermath because he's dead. The Monday Night football bit was corrected by another editor. Yes, there are two depictions of the doorway of the Dakota, one is a photo and one is the police sketch of the murder. It's borderline redundant, but relevasnt to the DEATH of Lennon. Let's get other opinions Hotcop2 (talk) 12:54, 29 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Would you be happier if we renamed the "Aftermath" section "Legacy"? Then I think even you would have to admit it would be an important addition. As to the Dakota sketch, esp. so close to the Dakota photo - it just begs the question "why"? What does the sketch tell us that the photo doesn't? Or couldn't by amending the caption? If anything is too much, that clearly is. But if you feel strongly about it, and since it's clearly been there for a while, I won't press it. I also don't object to getting other editor's opinions, but can we at least agree to put the photo back up pending consensus - so people can actually SEE what they're discussing? That seems fair to me. X4n6 (talk) 13:08, 29 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This article is just about his murder. His legacy is already included in the article about him. All the photos here relate specifically to December 8th, 1980 (the Imagine mosiac being an aftermath). The sketch depicts the actual murder; I'd prefer to keep that and get rid of the photo of the same entryway, tho that shows the steps he climbed, which is what makes them different. You found good spots for that photo in three other articles. Hotcop2 (talk) 13:21, 29 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I can take or leave the Dakota images. Leave them both. It doesn't hurt anything. As for the rest, I see what you mean. You'd like the focus to be only on the day's events. But then in the Aftermath section it specifically talks about the mourners singing keeping Yoko awake but she would join them for a memorial the next day. But no photo. Even the Ono article has a photo of her taking flowers to Strawberry Fields. Just seems to me it would be nice to have some photo of Lennon in the last sections, just to put a visual finish to the article. Some image of John in life to complete the article about his death - since his impact didn't end just because he died. Any suggestions? X4n6 (talk) 14:06, 29 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Even a photo of the fans gathered at the Dakota the night of would make sense. Just so you know, I had gotten permission from Bob Gruen to use the New York City t-shirt photo (the most iconic photo of all) on the Lennon page but it was removed because it was 'second party permission'. I'm not in love with any of the photos in the Lennon article, but those are what we have to chose from. Hotcop2 (talk) 14:30, 29 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Glad you agree that some kind of visual would be very useful near the end of the article, instead of just type. Also impressed that you tried to use the Gruen photo, which you had acquired the permission for. Obviously you clearly appreciate how nice it is to bring something very special to the project that wouldn't be there without you. Frankly, if I were you, I'd re-use your image and just tag it "fair use", so it would stand the best chance of not getting removed by some overzealous, delete-happy editor... Ahh, those editors... :) X4n6 (talk) 06:38, 30 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is a discussion occuring here involving debate about whether or not the Beatles were "active" during 1994-1996. Your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 22:49, 21 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

FYI, there is a vote taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 03:27, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is a Straw Poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 22:39, 24 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please do not insert false information into Wikipedia. You reverted a change, effectively restoring a false image caption at John Lennon, when the image was clearly done by photographer Jack Mitchell. See original image: File:Lennons by Jack Mitchell.jpg. I assume you made a mistake, so we'll leave it at that. -- Alexf^(talk) 22:26, 4 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The photo was changed without consensus. Hotcop2 (talk) 22:30, 4 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Then go ahead and change the photo back to the previous one and make a comment in the edit summary that consensus is required. No problem there. What you did was change the caption saying this photo was a self-portrait which is false. Cheers! -- Alexf^(talk) 22:47, 4 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I didn't mean to do that. I was trying to undo the change, but instead of "preview" I hit "submit." And before I had a chance to change it back, you did ;-)Hotcop2 (talk) 22:51, 4 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Unfortunately, there is a straw poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated.--andreasegde (talk) 11:39, 8 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Plaque.jpg, 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 are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 12:51, 14 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An image or media file you uploaded or altered, Dwplaque.jpg, has been listed at Commons Deletion requests.

You can read and participate in the deletion discussion if you are interested or do not wish the file to be deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 12:57, 14 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello — this message is to inform you that there is currently a public poll to determine whether to capitalize the definite article ("the") when mentioning the band "THE BEATLES" mid-sentence. As you've previously participated either here, here, or here, your input would be appreciated. Thank you for your time. Jburlinson (talk) 03:26, 20 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey HotCop, the article body hasn't mentioned the album yet, so I'm gonna go ahead and revert this edit. Please discuss in talk if you think I am in error. ~ GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 03:46, 24 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I see it now, disregard previous post. Nice catch, I'm tired. ~ GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 03:48, 24 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I do not understand why you undid my edit about Lennon playing bass very sporadically. Lennon was not a bass guitar player at all and in the only few occasions he took the instrument was because Paul McCartney for several reasons was unavailable (either absent or playing another instrument). If one adds "bass" as instruments played by Lennon then you must add this instrument for almost any guitar player registered on Wikipedia. That Lennon played guitar, keyboards (piano, organ, ...) and harmonica is evident. But bass !!! Anyone present in the studio could have played the very rare bass parts that Lennon indeed play.

Mark Lewisohn in his book about the Beatles recording said that Harrison and Lennon probably overdubbed some drums parts over McCartney's main drums part (Ringo had quit the group for about 10 days at the time) in "Back in the USSR".

So in this case why don't you add drums in Lennon article ? Lennon a drummer ? Lennon a bass guitar player ? Certainly not.

Therefore I think that it isn't accurate to add bass in Lennon article or if one adds this mention, a reservation like mine "very sporadically" is needed Carlo Colussi (talk) 07:15, 11 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree that the bass shouldn't even be there, or we'd have to include every other instrument that he ever breathed on (i.e. tambourine and percussion, etc). I didn't add bass to the article. However, we don't quantify entrees by the number of times an instrument is played. If bass has to be in there, it's there without the quantifier. Hotcop2 (talk) 11:32, 11 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I appreciate your edits, but please refrain from tweaking the section while I have an (in use) tag up. I just got a major edit conflict that I think I've fixed. I should be done adding to the section very soon. Thanks again for your help and advice! ~ GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 01:10, 19 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay, I think I'm through with that section for now so please do tweak away! Thanks again for all your help, years ago and now! ~ GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 01:18, 19 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This might do for now. I'll put this in with one that verifies the 2005 playing. ~ GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:03, 19 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think I've got it properly sourced now. Let me know what you think. Cheers! ~ GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:41, 19 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You were right about the end of the lead needing something, well done! ~ GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 01:59, 20 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This was fun. Hotcop2 (talk) 02:00, 20 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree, and please, add yourself as a co-nom at the FAC page. You've done so much for the article, the project, and for me. Much of your early Wikipedia advice has proved helpful time and time again. Cheers! ~ GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 02:10, 20 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey HC2, if you don't want to add yourself as an FAC co-nom, then please do take the time to !vote. Cheers! ~ GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 01:00, 30 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

LOL I don't know anything about Wiki stuff, honestly. Just like to have articles I know a little bit about up to snuff. It's all yours. Good job Hotcop2 (talk) 01:12, 3 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks HC2, but why don't you at least want to !vote? ~ GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 01:37, 3 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Send me the link, I'll vote for the article. Hotcop2 (talk) 16:00, 3 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Here is the link to the FAC. Hope you made it through Sandy without too much problem. Cheers! ~ GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:31, 3 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey HC2, per your comment: "Pang also says that Sanford's acct of Paul and John meeting isn't true." 1) I assume you mean she refutted the second meeting a day or two after the "toot" jam, 2) but where did she refute Sandford? Sandford wrote his book in 2006 while Pang's was written in 1983. Also, Badman 2001 agrees with Sandford that J&P played together on two separate occasions within a day or so. Any thoughts? GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:00, 13 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Actually she told me, but that doesn't count on wiki. John and Paul got together the night before the Pussycats sessions began (Toot and Snore) but the sessions began the next day, none of which McCartney attended. Also, this one session happened at Burbank Studios where some books have it at Lennon and Pang's beachhouse, and other books, and even on the Record Plant Website itself, has it taking place there, which it did not. Usually, someone has the correct version written somewhere, and i try to find it so as to put a proper ref in. But just because someone writes something in a book, and two years later someone else writes a book and repeats the wrong info, doesn't make it correct. I rather the articles are correct. There a great new ref book coming out in 2014 on all things Lennon. That'll be helpful. Hotcop2 (talk) 00:22, 13 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Doggett (2009, pp.218-219) confirms Sandford (2006) and Badman (2001). Verifiability, not truth is the threshhold for inclusion in Wikipedia. Also, isn't it at all possible that Pang forgot the second, much less memorable session while disputing Sandford's account about an event that occurred nearly 39 years ago? E.g. George Harrison didn't remember that the Beatles played Shea Stadium twice. FWIW, I agree that the secondary sources are not in full agreement in regard to the exact specifics of the jam/s, but if Pang was there at both sessions (assuming there were two sessions) then she is a primary source who is trumped by the secondary sources anyway. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:32, 13 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

She wasn't at the second one because there wasn't a second one. And both John and Paul talk about the "time they jammed" -- no primary source ever pluralizes it. Hotcop2 (talk) 01:22, 13 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And no, Pang would not have forgotten a second session of John and Paul lol. Hotcop2 (talk) 01:30, 13 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

But George Harrison forgot a second Beatles Shea Stadium gig. Anyway, in Many Years From Now (1997, pp. 590-592), Macca recounts that he attended a recording session (Pussy Cats) then, the next day he went to Lennon and Pang's beach home, but he does not mention doing anything musical with Lennon whatsoever, so, if Macca mentioned the jam/s, in which source did he do so? Also, the event is not mentioned in Coleman's Lennon bio (1985). Are you aware of any sources that have Lennon or Macca recounting the jam/s? GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 01:49, 13 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEf42C_M9IA Hotcop2 (talk) 02:32, 13 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• (edit conflict) This youtube vid (event occurs at 1:45) has Lennon mentioning the LA jam/s and he says that "he jammed with Paul" during this period, but this is not anywhere close to a reliable source for either one or two jams. FTR, I'm with you, I want the info to be correct, but it must also be reliably sourced. To say they only played together once would be to go against the bulk of WP:RSs, where several, if not most that mention it say there was a studio encounter that involved some music and then perhaps the next day, or two days later an informal "jam" at the beach-house. Since the house was filled with musicians and instruments it's a bit difficult for me to imagine Macca going over there without some type of musical activity occuring. What we need to verify or disprove is whether or not that second visit resultd in a proper "jam" ... there are two pictures of Macca playing a piano (one alongside Ringo) at the beach-house in Pang's book, Instamatic Karma, here, and here. According to Sandford, they jammed on 7 or 8 tunes that day at the beach-house. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 02:43, 13 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

According to Pang, who WAS there, they didn't. Paul began to play, John left the room. I doubt Pang or Linda would've missed the opportunity to photograph them in the house playing together. Anyway, since we'll never KNOW how many times they may have jammed together in private, we know of only one. Sandford was not there for any of these things; I guess he needed some interesting twists in old stories to sell new books. 03:47, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

• Also, FWIW, the last time Lennon saw Macca was one of the numerous times in which Paul would show up at John's doorstep with a guitar in hand, implying that they had in fact played together since 1974 anyway, so that we are splitting hairs on whether or not the 74' jam/s were one or two seems a bit moot. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 03:11, 13 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I concede. Lets go with what Pang knows. That sounds about right actually, Paul playing almost incessantly and John walking away. Why didn't Pang photograph them together at the session? Too much "tooting"? GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 04:20, 13 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The McCartneys showed up unexpectedly at the studio. Pang was working as "production coordinator" for Pussycats. There was no camera. Even if she had brought one, she was busy on tambourine. And Linda was busy on organ. lolHotcop2 (talk) 04:24, 13 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Right! Well, take a look and see if you like it now. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 04:26, 13 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Looks good. In the next couple of years, a couple of books will come out that will greatly help our cause here, you'll see. Hotcop2 (talk) 04:37, 13 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • I'll be looking forward to that. Cheers! GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 04:52, 13 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am preliminarily concerned about the discussion that you and I have undertaken on the "Happy Xmas (War Is Over)" talk page. I do not count myself immune to criticism: if you have valid concerns about the changes I made to the article, then by all means direct them my way, and I will attempt to address them. I realise that you and others have put a lot of work into the article, and I hope you know that, by rewriting it, I was not trying to "take" it from you, thereby invalidating your contributions, and claim it instead for my own. I merely thought that I could help improve the article, and proceeded accordingly. We are all on the same side here. The editorial process remains, as always, a collaborative and, I hope, congenial one. Best regards — Apo-kalypso (talk) 00:33, 21 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I like what you did with the article. I don't think I "own" it, sorry if I gave that impression. My problem with Beatle articles in particular is that every year, there are 5 or 6 "new" books about them. In order to sell these new books, claims are made/stories are told in great depth -- by people who weren't there and who do not source any "interview or contact" reference to any one who actually was. These narratives make for great reads, and are often repeated in subseqeunt books, but still have no basis in the first place. I'm off on this tangent because we're talking about "sources and references in concurrence" -- if the page is about a song, Lennon in particular would often cite where the "inspiration" came from. I just think it all the conjecture dilutes an article that you really cracked into shape. Hotcop2 (talk) 02:23, 21 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

One thing that was removed from the article (not by you) was the "Come Back To Jamaica" rewrite of 1978, which was a valid point and can be seen and heard on youtube (I'm old enough to remember it on television actually). Hotcop2 (talk) 02:25, 21 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm trying to find Lennon's quote, in which he basically said 'I wrote Happy Xmas to replace White Christmas as the perrenial favorite' -- I think it was in Playboy, which you might want to add to the article, as soon as I find the ref. Hotcop2 (talk) 03:01, 21 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Responding in order:

1. Not to worry. I just wanted to be respectful of your investment in the article and not seem like I was running roughshod over it on the way to planting my own flag, so to speak. Many thanks for the positive appraisal. I understand your concerns about the reliability of the sources. Two were in fact recently published, but the other was authored by Jon Wiener and originally came out in 1984 (I cited the 1991 edition) – for whatever that may be worth. Among the three, his is the one that details the "War is over" connections to the greatest extent. Is his claim based more on interpretation than fact? I cannot say for certain, but I don't think it should be dismissed on that basis alone. Wikipedia requires us to maintain a neutral point of view in editing and represent "fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources." Rest assured that the choice to include it was a carefully considered one. Given the degree of uncertainty, however, I added qualifiers so as not to make a definite assertion one way or the other, and like I said on the talk page, I don't think it is given undue weight within the framework of the article, especially compared to previous versions where it was presented in its very own section. Is the information extraneous to the song? Not entirely, I think, because it lends itself to a somewhat broader understanding of the song's context. Would taking it out irreparably damage the article and readers' understanding of its subject? Perhaps not.

2. I actually did investigate the link with the Jamaica tourism commercial, but I was unable turn up any remotely reliable source to support the claim that it was set to the tune of "Happy Xmas". To be sure, there are similarities, but one could just as well say that it sounds like "Stewball" (insofar as that is concerned, the same goes for "Happy Xmas"). In either case, without an acceptable source to lend it plausibility, the claim amounts to subjective interpretation and someone will likely tag and remove it again.

3. Lennon is quoted in the Richard Williams article as saying that he was "sick of 'White Christmas'", but the quote does not go any farther than that.

— Apo-kalypso (talk) 06:10, 21 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Hotcop2. Not sure if you've seen it, but I've left a reply to the message you put on my talk. Btw, if you see anything that doesn't look right/add up, please feel free to revert. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 19:28, 1 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Took care of it!! I thought it was Yoko Ono since that is what the website I got it from said. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pollack man34 (talk • contribs) 00:40, 19 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Hotcop2. You have new messages at GabeMc's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Village People may have broken the syntax by modifying 4 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:28, 17 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. You have a new message at Tvoz's talk page. Tvoz/talk 00:59, 10 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm curious as to why you reverted all of my edits on the Y.M.C.A. article. I'm not heavily invested in any particular outcome, just curious about your rationale. The article is one of today's featured "Articles Needing Improvement" in the community portal. I looked at the article, and aside from the fact that it had the most interesting and culturally relevant aspect of the song buried 3/4 of the way down the page, it looked okay. So I did a little bit of research and took a stab at underlining the real reason for the song's cultural importance in the introduction. You've reverted the article to the state it was in before it was nominated as one of the articles needing improvement today. You've cut out the Oral History from Spin Magazine, which is probably the most important reference material about the song available on the internet. No one else has really done anything. I'm just interested in hearing your rationale here.ThomasMikael (talk) 14:14, 4 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I thought some of your edits were fine and some approached the dreaded wiki "pov" issue. As I don't know how to undo all edits in one felt swoop, then keep the parts that were good, I undid them one at a time and then made an edit that I think reflected your good points. I don't necessarily buy what Willis says about the lyrics, but he said it, it's sourced and he wrote the track. Hotcop2 (talk) 14:25, 4 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hmmm... Fair enough. As I said, I'm not that invested in one outcome or another. But for the sake of clarification, can you point me to where the POV issue is outlined. My feeling is that the revisions I made reflected what was written in the sources that I cited. The GLBTQ article on the YMCA and the oral history in Spin Magazine, both of which reflect a healthy mix of "expert" opinion and reliable historical anecdote. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThomasMikael (talk • contribs) 15:50, 5 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

True, but those were 5 paragraphs that merely reiterated what was already said in the one "taken at face value" line, which is followed by Willis' denial and love of double entendre. Village People wrote other songs which were more important, pointed and non-obscured "gay anthems" while this was a tongue-in-cheeky song that became very popular with no particular value to LBGT community. It helped the YMCA more than anything lol. Hotcop2 (talk) 16:24, 5 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Hotcop2, I just noticed your photo on Dave Winfield's page, and I was wondering if there's any chance that you took a photo of Kirby Puckett that day, since he was inducted during the same ceremony. I'm trying to get a non-fair use photo of Puckett so that I can use it in a separate article. I'd totally understand if not, but I thought it was worth a shot. Thanks! Delaywaves • talk 23:16, 4 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I did, I'll dig it up for you. I also filmed the guys, I put the video on youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ItZsO5DZ1g. I'll find you a still shot. Hotcop2 (talk) 00:30, 5 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you so much! Let me know whenever you get the chance; there's certainly no rush. Delaywaves • talk 03:11, 5 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I found photos from the announcement in NYC in February 2001. I gave Puckett the photos of him at Cooperstown. I have to find the negatives, so letting you know I'm still looking. Hotcop2 (talk) 14:05, 24 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, why did you revert my correction regarding the use of British English for the English musician John Lennon? I'm under the impression that most Wikipedia articles that are of importance to the UK are written in British English, while most articles of importance to the US are in American English, and I think this is also official Wikipedia policy or recommendation. I reasoned that since Lennon was English, his article should be in UK English rather than US English, so that's why I changed learned to learnt. What do you think about it? Cogiati (talk) 17:58, 28 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry mate. I'm a Yankee; didn't know -- but I just learnt something ;-) Hotcop2 (talk) 19:54, 28 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey, I know you know alot about the Beatles, but taking out that whole section in the Yoko article and neglecting to put to elsewhere is editing in bad faith. Maybe it was a temporary moment of impatience, but don't do it again please.--Aichik (talk) 17:53, 5 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It wasn't a section, it was a paragraph, which had nothing to do with where you put it and didn't fit in anywhere else. However, it works fine under the new sub-section you created. Hotcop2 (talk) 20:14, 5 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No problem! Thank you so much for taking the time to check. Delaywaves • talk 02:38, 8 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Coming Up (song) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• |Certification = <small>RIAA (US) Gold 21 July 1980)</small><ref>((cite web|title=RIAA Gold and Platinum|url=http://www.riaa.com/goldandplatinumdata.
• [[music video]], with Paul McCartney playing ten roles and Linda McCartney playing two. The "band" (identified as "The Plastic Macs" on the drum kit—an homage to Lennon's conceptual [[Plastic Ono Band <ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwH6nJ-aqQE</ref><ref>The McCartney Years DVD,

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:44, 27 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I haven't gotten to Clemente yet. I will remove it when I edit his.--Yankees10 23:16, 22 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The photo obviously depicts 251 Menlove Ave, not his early childhood home. The information given cannot be correct, since the house is the same as that in the photo below. The only thing you contributed by reverting the edit was scaring people off from contributing and improving the encyclopedia. A6tf3t (talk) 23:41, 24 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What I did is act on what you pointed out -- two pictures of the same house. So I deleted one. If you'd like to post a picture of 9 Newcastle Rd, his childhood home, then it would make sense to have two photos. Hotcop2 (talk) 01:21, 25 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Hotcop2. You have new messages at Muboshgu's talk page.
Message added 03:09, 30 August 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.Reply[reply]

– Muboshgu (talk) 03:09, 30 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[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) 17:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Hotcop2. 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[reply]

Hello, Hotcop2. 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[reply]

I don't think Tug Of War is his 11th album for a few reasons. First of all, the years 1971-1979 were all credited to the band Wings and not McCartney. It's like saying Please Please Me is the debut studio by John Lennon y'know? GHDmnespafro (talk) 21:10, 30 September 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Hotcop2. 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[reply]

A tag has been placed on File:Lennon Imagine 45 cover Apple.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused duplicate or lower-quality copy of another file on Wikipedia having the same file format, and all inward links have been updated.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Quail Armor 14:47, 29 March 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quail Armor (talk • contribs)

The page File:CD single cover for the Village People Christmas single.jpg has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image was an unused duplicate or lower-quality copy of another file on Wikipedia having the same file format, and all inward links were updated.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion Review — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:07, 9 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:09, 19 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Hotcop2. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "A Very Merry Christmas to You".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the ((db-afc)), ((db-draft)), or ((db-g13)) code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 21:44, 4 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed 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 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:42, 24 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Macho Man (album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Peter Whitehead. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:14, 22 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Daily Mail is a deprecated source, considered unreliable for just about anything. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. That's why I removed your paragraph about Janet Jackson's nipple slip. Binksternet (talk) 00:52, 12 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 23 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi there. Apologies in my edit summary for the change on "I'll Cry Instead". I misidentified you as the other editor because I didn't look close enough. Cheers. Tkbrett (✉) 17:02, 2 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Greetings. I suppose the problem was lack of source. I re-added with it. --Alkalin (talk) 12:44, 30 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

Continual reverting/edit warring on May Pang page after any page amendments have been made. Would prefer amicable resolution, good reasoning and factual well-balanced references in order to improve the factual content of the page. It may be GA but it's still open to further improvement and better factual accuracy. Please use the May Pang talk page to discuss. Thanks.

Awesomasaurus (talk) 14:16, 21 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed 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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

e.g. for a line of space, as well as more of a description than just the section name. Thanks. NjtoTX (talk) 14:55, 16 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Murder of John Lennon, you may be blocked from editing. Sundayclose (talk) 02:53, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're wrong. According to North's source, himself, he reported the shooting 11;32 -- two minutes after Cosell announced the death. I'll leave it because it won't bring John back and it seems important to you. Hotcop2 (talk) 02:57, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What part of "reliable source" do you not understand? Sundayclose (talk) 03:03, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Murder of John Lennon. Sundayclose (talk) 14:40, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

::What are you blathering about. I didn't add unsourced material and I put the announcement in chronological order. Hotcop2 (talk) 15:16, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Neither source states that Lennon died at 11:24. Again, what part of "reliable source" do you not understand? And watch your tone. Sundayclose (talk) 15:51, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The LIR youtube source confirmed and announced Lennon's death 1 minute and 20 seconds into its initial 11:22 "time check" so it was 11:23 and change... my math was off. Tone duly noted ;-) Hotcop2 (talk) 16:31, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, they state the time at the beginning of the video as 11:32. Then no other specific time or time frame is mentioned. I'm not sure how you came up with "announced Lennon's death 1 minute and 20 seconds into its initial 11:22 'time check'". I'm serious: You need to review WP:RS as well as WP:SYN. You can't synthesize a conclusion based on your personal speculation about when a "time check" occurred or how much time passed between Lennon's death and the start of the video. But no harm done (other than multiple annoyances and about 10 minutes of my time wasted) if you'll simply leave the article as it is. Sundayclose (talk) 16:46, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]