User talk:Ecto

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

thanks for your edit at talk:Jim Jones and Welcome!

Hello, Ecto, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Andries 21:34, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Please note that the Jim Jones article has two formats of references: a new format that I used for the monkey and an old format that I had used previously that has to be replaced. Please do keep editing Wikipedia and insert references with the new format even after the unjustified and possibly disappointing revert of your edit on Jim Jones. Andries 10:28, 11 February 2006 (UTC) 212.159.79.225 18:59, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 Welcome 2 Just checking in and an award 3 Funny Punk 4 Theta Beta Potata PUNK HOUSE Deletion Review 4.1 Theta Beta Potata 5 Lindskoog vs The Dark Tower

[edit] Welcome

I've noticed you've been as busy as a punk rock bee since you signed up a few days ago. Good job with the punk related articles, it is good to see some new changes, especially on the punk page. The Ungovernable Force 09:01, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Just checking in and an award

I wanted to see how your editing has been going recently. I have to say once again, good job on the punk article, you have really made it great! I was wanting someone to make an article that focused on the whole culture and not just the music, so I congratulate you. I think if we source the material, we could probably get it to be a featured article pretty soon.

Anyway, I gave someone a devilock a few days ago while at school, it was pretty cool, especially since I had never cut anyone's hair other than my own (and all I did to myself was shave parts off into a tri-hawk, then a mohawk, then with a 1/2 inch clip). It was fun. I should start a punk hair salon. The Ungovernable Force 09:02, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the star! There's a lot left to do for the punk article, especially the 'History' section. I'm not sure if I'm up to the task of writing a history of punk article. I had an awesome outline for it, but that got deleted by accident, and I haven't had the heart to take another crack at it. I've been meaning to hit up the library for some of the books listed in the bibliography for references for punk. There's also some web sources we could use. Once the 'History', 'Fashion', 'Mainstream and popular culture', and 'Subcultures within punk' sections are done/redone, and everything is fully sourced, then I think it would pass a nomination for GA. Heh, back in the day I used to have a green faux, followed by a black devilockish deal, then I went short and choppy, and now I have a businessman. It's funny how hair changes. Ecto 07:59, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I used to have a mullet just like billy ray cirus (I was under 10 at the time, mom's idea). Then I let the top grow out and I had long hair down to my butt. Then I cut it Kurt Cobain style to my shoulders. Then I cut it like the guy in Moulin Rouge (my grandma needed a picture of how I wanted it, and that was the best I could find), then I cut it to about 2 inches, then a 3 inch tri-hawk, then a 3 1/2 inch mohawk, then a 1/2 inch clip, and now I'm letting it grow out to about ear length I think, but it's still only a bit more than 1/2 an inch. I wear a bandana so people don't think I'm a bonehead ;). I recently changed the history to early history, since it only goes up to the late 70s. When you lost the outline, had you saved it at all, because part of it might still be in the history? If you need any help, just holler. The Ungovernable Force 08:09, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Haha, mullets... Nope, the outline was on my old hard drive, which died horribly. There's a bit of it left in the history of punk, but only very general section titles I was considering. I'll put an outline up in my sandbox or somewhere when I get it cranked out, and I'll give you a nudge then. Ecto 09:40, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Funny Punk

Hey, you created Funny punk, but the thing is, I can't find any info on it outside of wikipedia. Are you sure this is a notable genre, and if so, can you direct me to some sources? I was going to list it for deletion, but I thought I'd ask first. The Ungovernable Force 08:15, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I added a reference, and more shouldn't be that hard to find. My local library has absolutely no books about punk, so I can't provide any paper sources. Anyway, check it out. Ecto 16:55, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Although I see that some people have used it, I'm still not sure it is really what we could consider an established genre. I've never seen the term before. A google search for "funny punk" returns only 17,400 hits (most of which are unrelated), while "anarcho punk" and "crust punk" have 168,000 and 136,000 respectively. It just doesn't seem up to snuff for an article here, especially without a better source (and you won't find one in a library, trust me). I can understand using the term in general conversation and it seems like a useful genre classification, but I'm afraid it is more of a neoligism than an recognized subgenre. The Ungovernable Force 05:27, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I've heard it before. 17,400 hits is alright for a substyle. That's in the same neighbouthood as, say, post-punk revival (check it out). It's kind of ridiculous to expect funny punk, or a lot of other substyles, to have as many hits as anarcho-punk or crust punk, especially anarcho-punk, which is huge. The average I've seen for styles less obscure than funny punk but more obscure than anarcho-punk is about 100,000. You can nominate the article for deletion if you want. Maybe that would tease out some more references. Ecto 18:31, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

One last point, like I said, most (actually, all) the hits I saw were unrelated to a genre. It was just any time the word punk followed the word funny. The Ungovernable Force 01:08, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I've listed it for deletion. See here to comment. Don't take it personally. The Ungovernable Force 08:38, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Theta Beta Potata PUNK HOUSE Deletion Review

[edit] Theta Beta Potata

This article was first started by me and was deleted back in May '06. I was reading the punk house article and saw that the link for the TBP article was no longer red so I clicked on it and there was an article back up, started by another user. I dont know who started it because, it was deleted soon after I saw it. The decision made in the "Article for Deletion" debate should be reconsidered. The article is about a punk house not a fratenal organization. It seems that the debate, run by User:ChrisB and results were reported by User:Mailer Diablo. I will post this on their talk pages. This is the first time I have requested a deletion review so please let me know what else I need to do. If there is anything. I am on wikipedia frequently and I want to learn. Thanks. Xsxex 16:28, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lindskoog vs The Dark Tower

Hi. You wrote here that "Several critics have challenged the authenticity of" The Dark Tower (1977 novel). We currently mention one, Kathryn Lindskoog. I suggest that we either name at least one other critic, or change that sentence. What do you think? Cheers from Australia, CWC(talk) 17:41, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Come to think of it, Lindskoog was the only critic from whom I've heard that claim. Yes, we should change that sentence. Ecto 23:24, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Nice fix. Thanks, CWC(talk) 00:39, 30 August 2006 (UTC)