Talk:Brian Chase

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Untitled

Umm..the Yeah Yeah Yeahs are a pretty big band. I don't see how this is a speedy--Shanel 02:18, 27 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted back from redirect

I've reverted this back from the redirect. Please wait until the discussion on that issue is closed before reverting again. That article may or may not be kept. -- Malber (talkcontribs) 20:20, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also see [1]. This is a sensitive issue, so I think it's important for this article to keep the (drummer) part of the name so the other entry can be protected. -- Malber (talkcontribs) 20:36, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sean7phil

Please be aware that Brian Chase the musician is not the same person as Brian Chase the wikipedia editor. Adding defamatory material to this, or any article, is asking to get blocked. Wwwhatsup (talk) 16:40, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Opps! Sorry!

Just an observation-- the link at the top of this article goes right to the Seigenthaler article that mentions defamation. That link creates the (mistaken) impression that this is the one-and-same Brian Chase. I suggest removing that link as it creates confusion.

Also, adding a note to the article explaining that this is not the same Brian Chase would be a better disambiguation. Nevertheless, my apologies.

Sean7phil (talk) 16:42, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That redirect is specifically to direct people like you to the correct article. Wwwhatsup (talk) 16:46, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

However well intentioned-- it serves to confuse.

It makes it look (incorrectly) like this is the Brian Chase associated with the controversy.

There should instead be a statement that says "NOT the same Brian Chase associated with the Wikipedia controversy".

(Boldface only added as suggested format for the suggested disambiguation line, not meant in any other way).

Whether or not that is Wikipedia standard procedure, that would be a lot more effective.

Sean7phil (talk) 16:52, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have boldy updated the disambig. PouponOnToast (talk) 16:56, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks! And again, I apologize for my error as well. Although if I made that mistake, others may have as well.

Best,

Sean7phil (talk) 16:58, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Giant bold text isn't exactly encyclopedic. Let's see if the word "unrelated" solves the problem. PouponOnToast (talk) 17:01, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems so hard to see that one small word-- "unrelated". It's very easy to miss it.

It's only one word to disambiguate the whole issue--

I missed that one word completely until I re-read it (and others may be missing it too).

Could a comment in the body of the article be added too?

That's my last suggestion. I'll let you guys handle it.

Thanks,

Sean7phil (talk) 17:04, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the correction should work well. Making too big a thing in the body of the article will just serve to create confusion. You cannot be held responsible for people not reading things properly if what was written is unambiguous (like the way the redirect is written at the moment). StephenBuxton (talk) 17:09, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You missed the word because it wasn't there when you had your problem - I added it afterwards. I strongly oppose changing the article's body to compromise encyclopedic standards. PouponOnToast (talk) 17:14, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I vote for humanity over protocol. Making the extra effort to be absolutely sure is humanity. That trumps protocol any day.

OK, I'm gone now.

Sean7phil (talk) 17:18, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Phew! Wwwhatsup (talk) 17:25, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:54, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]