Lukpac

Welcome!

Hello, Lukpac, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may be removed if they have not yet been. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. As well, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Simplified 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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or you can type {{helpme}} on your user page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Epeefleche (talk) 22:03, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

September 2011

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to If I Fell, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted (undone) by ClueBot NG.

• Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
• ClueBot NG produces very few false positives, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been detected as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• The following is the log entry regarding this warning: If I Fell was changed by Lukpac (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.976298 on 2011-09-08T05:10:36+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 05:10, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

June 2013

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to The Guess Who. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Please do not restore uncited material unless you provide inline RS refs that properly support the material -- per wp:burden. Epeefleche (talk) 18:35, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

The material should be on the page; it doesn't make sense without it, as then the article jumps right to the band reforming without any mention of it breaking up. Requesting a citation is fine, but selectively removing that block destroys the continuity of the article as a whole. Lukpac (talk) 18:39, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. As discussed above. It is fine to remove other unsourced material as well. And it is fine to edit sourced material to make it read more smoothly. It is not fine for you to -- as you have now done more than once, even after being warned, and even after wp:before has been brought to your attention, for you to re-add challenged unsourced material without supplying RS refs directly supporting it. And, of course, the lack of citations has been a problem since 2009, when the article was tagged for that malady. Epeefleche (talk) 21:56, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Lukpac. 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)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Lukpac. 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)

Teo Macero and Kind of Blue

"Kind of Blue was the first time that Macero was the producer for an entire Miles session." (Eric Nisenson, in The Making of Kind of Blue) Dan56 (talk) 21:30, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

"It was a long time ago, but as I remember it, we made that record..." (Teo Macero, in The Making of Kind of Blue) Dan56 (talk) 21:40, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

He isn’t listed in Columbia’s documentation, his voice isn’t on the session tapes, and he was in LA producing Brubeck’s Gone With The Wind during the second session.

An encyclopedia reports what has been published in reliable sources; it does not submit original research. You can add your findings (from reliable sources, not vague photographs posted at forums) to the article, as contrasting reports, but you cannot cherrypick-out items you disagree with. Dan56 (talk) 00:21, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

As indicated on your talk page, multiple sources indicate that not only was Macero not involved, he was (by his own admission) involved in his first production project on the other side of the country. And as noted, every release starting in 1997 indicates Kind of Blue was produced by Irving Townsend; Macero's name is not even mentioned in the liner notes.

The only appropriate thing to add would be a note in the Kind of Blue entry indicating that Macero has been listed as producer incorrectly. Lukpac (talk) 00:32, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

• Jazzdisc.org is not reliable (WP:SPS); see [1] Dan56 (talk) 00:59, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
• Producer credits for Gone With The Wind are considered reliable by you; yet not Kind of Blue reissue credits? Dan56 (talk) 00:59, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
• The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence, in reference to the transcription piece in the NPR source you cited.
• Forums are not reliable. Dan56 (talk) 00:59, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

As noted, the Kind of Blue reissue credits do not mention Macero and indicate it was produced by Townsend. Lukpac (talk) 01:02, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

• [2] Dan56 (talk) 01:09, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Subsequently corrected:

https://img.discogs.com/vpgg0jNpTt2jp4bfy5ETJx51z4k=/fit-in/600x622/filters:strip_icc():format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(90)/discogs-images/R-3354956-1327089476.jpeg.jpg Lukpac (talk) 01:13, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Subsequently changed, is all that shows. Dan56 (talk) 01:15, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Don't form your own conclusions; report what sources reporting both sides of this dispute say (Wikipedia:Conflicting sources) These events happened 60 years ago; how reliable can either account (of either album Macero's name was attached to) be trusted wholly? Dan56 (talk) 01:16, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Sony, who owns the album, has already made a conclusion, that Kind of Blue was produced by Irving Townsend. That conclusion is supported by significant evidence. Lukpac (talk) 01:36, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Sony is a primary source; "Do not analyze, evaluate, interpret, or synthesize material found in a primary source yourself; instead, refer to reliable secondary sources that do so." Dan56 (talk) 01:55, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

There’s no analysis or interpretation necessary: Sony indicates the album was produced by Townsend, period. Lukpac (talk) 02:35, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

🙄 Dan56 (talk) 12:24, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

March 2019

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 BRD 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Dan56 (talk) 00:59, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

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) 00:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

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) 01:31, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

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) 00:11, 23 November 2021 (UTC)