I know the wiki community frowns on the subject editing their own stuff, and I'm pretty lousy with their interface and formatting anyways.

"What's The Question" was in the wrong spot in the hierarchy, and is discontinued now anyways

There's a new section called Music Trivia that should be added in after the misheard lyrics

The totals for the misheard lyrics and song parodies should be updated since the numbers are more impressive looking now

Some kind of mention about the misheard lyrics book would be cool, maybe a link to the amIright page about it too?  Probably should add it to the mondegreen entry as well in the bibliography for that page.

I know the wiki community frowns on the subject editing their own stuff, and I'm pretty lousy with their interface and formatting anyways.

"What's The Question" was in the wrong spot in the hierarchy, and is discontinued now anyways

There's a new section called Music Trivia that should be added in after the misheard lyrics

The totals for the misheard lyrics and song parodies should be updated since the numbers are more impressive looking now

Some kind of mention about the misheard lyrics book would be cool, maybe a link to the amIright page about it too?  Probably should add it to the mondegreen entry as well in the bibliography for that page.


About the wiki entry, I moved the text in your WP Talk page to your user page - I know you're a bit of a noob there, but the talk page is used to discuss issues concerning the user in WP...

About the wiki entry, I moved the text in your WP Talk page to your user page - I know you're a bit of a noob there, but the talk page is used to discuss issues concerning the user in WP...


I noticed someone edited my page, couldn't figure out why.  I knew it was you though, checked out your page.

I went ahead and did the modifications myself.  I don't think there's anything in the changes that will get me yelled at.  Funny that I hear people complain when someone edit's a page about them, yet when someone a year ago complained their page had slanderous lies about them on it, the response from wikipedia was they should have edited themselves.

Just saw this topic (sorry not here more often). I have an editing account at Wiki, but of course, it's not under Tommy Turtle, it's under a pseudonym.  :) If more changes are needed that you don't want to have as self-edited, pm me or email me -- you have the addy.  (Privately, not here on the boards, since anyone who sees it at Wiki could see it here also.) I'll try to take care of them when able. Yes, they are their own little clique with their own rules. Cheers.

Just saw this topic (sorry not here more often). I have an editing account at Wiki, but of course, it's not under Tommy Turtle, it's under a pseudonym.  :) If more changes are needed that you don't want to have as self-edited, pm me or email me -- you have the addy.  (Privately, not here on the boards, since anyone who sees it at Wiki could see it here also.) I'll try to take care of them when able. Yes, they are their own little clique with their own rules. Cheers.


will do... I suppose I could always make another account and use a proxy server to hide my identity too.  Personally I find their policies on self-editing to be a little ridiculous. 

will do... I suppose I could always make another account and use a proxy server to hide my identity too.  Personally I find their policies on self-editing to be a little ridiculous. 


They DON'T allow proxies, especially open ones, since this is open to abuse... You can always use a pseudonym, though... But Wikipedia's nice...

I think the whole of Wikipedia needs updating.

Found the Mondegreen total on the sitemap page, but can't find the latest Parody total. Where would it be?

Found the Mondegreen total on the sitemap page, but can't find the latest Parody total. Where would it be?


apparently it's not getting displayed anywhere now... I can fix that.

apparently it's not getting displayed anywhere now... I can fix that.

It's been updated, and the links refined. I think their markup code is the illegitimate love child of HTML and John Edwards.  ;D

It's probably worth updating the Parody total about every 5,000; i. e., 65,000, 70,000, etc. Feel free to e-mail me directly (or pm) as a reminder, as the Real World seems to keep me away from here for varying stretches of time.

It's been updated, and the links refined. I think their markup code is the illegitimate love child of HTML and John Edwards.  ;D

It's probably worth updating the Parody total about every 5,000; i. e., 65,000, 70,000, etc. Feel free to e-mail me directly (or pm) as a reminder, as the Real World seems to keep me away from here for varying stretches of time.


http://www.amiright.com/sitemap.shtml  -> Parodies -> Lyrics

this page does have the parody count... it's 61,068 as of today May 14th 

http://www.amiright.com/sitemap.shtml  -> Parodies -> Lyrics

this page does have the parody count... it's 61,068 as of today May 14th 

Right, I had found that after you made the fix and before my previous post. As per previous, was updated to "over 60,000", which will hold it until it hits, say, 65,000 etc.

Right, I had found that after you made the fix and before my previous post. As per previous, was updated to "over 60,000", which will hold it until it hits, say, 65,000 etc.



more importantly, I noticed the second book wasn't mentioned yet, so I updated that part of the entry to reflect the new book.

more importantly, I noticed the second book wasn't mentioned yet, so I updated that part of the entry to reflect the new book.

Sorry, I wasn't aware of that. Doubt you'll get any flak, since it's not a high-hit page there (or controversial), but if anyone says anything about "COI" (Conflict of Interest editing) and removes it, I can replace it, as a disinterested party. Let me know, if ever.

You can understand that in general, they don't want every author in the world using WP as spam to promote their own works - imagine the result. But the site is "notable" (their prime "keep/delete criterion"), so most things connected and derivative are worthy of mention, preferably by outside parties. Again, I doubt anyone will mess with the second book entry. Sorry I didn't include it -- OP was from 2007, which I was keying off, before the second book was published. Cheers.

Sorry, I wasn't aware of that. Doubt you'll get any flak, since it's not a high-hit page there (or controversial), but if anyone says anything about "COI" (Conflict of Interest editing) and removes it, I can replace it, as a disinterested party. Let me know, if ever.

You can understand that in general, they don't want every author in the world using WP as spam to promote their own works - imagine the result. But the site is "notable" (their prime "keep/delete criterion"), so most things connected and derivative are worthy of mention, preferably by outside parties. Again, I doubt anyone will mess with the second book entry. Sorry I didn't include it -- OP was from 2007, which I was keying off, before the second book was published. Cheers.


oh I know... kind of stupid policy though.  I remember there was someone notable who had copious amounts of BS in his bio on the website, and when he complained about it the response was "why didn't he just edit it" but at the same time the community complains when someone edits their own entry. 

Sorry, I wasn't aware of that. Doubt you'll get any flak, since it's not a high-hit page there (or controversial), but if anyone says anything about "COI" (Conflict of Interest editing) and removes it, I can replace it, as a disinterested party. Let me know, if ever.

You can understand that in general, they don't want every author in the world using WP as spam to promote their own works - imagine the result. But the site is "notable" (their prime "keep/delete criterion"), so most things connected and derivative are worthy of mention, preferably by outside parties. Again, I doubt anyone will mess with the second book entry. Sorry I didn't include it -- OP was from 2007, which I was keying off, before the second book was published. Cheers.


As long as we don't sprinkle the article with unnecessary praise, or slant it to an unfavourable POV, it's OK for the subject of the article to edit a page that is about himself or what he does. After all, there are some notable people who are also Wikipedians, and abide by the rules.