User talk:Kyle Peake/Archive 10

Your GA nomination of Drive Slow

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Drive Slow you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zmbro -- Zmbro (talk) 23:20, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Drive Slow

The article Drive Slow you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Drive Slow for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zmbro -- Zmbro (talk) 23:40, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Drive Slow

The article Drive Slow you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Drive Slow for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zmbro -- Zmbro (talk) 16:02, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Notice of reliable sources noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Counter-Currents.com for music. Thank you. Grayfell (talk) 20:10, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Lift Yourself

I was wondering if you would want to bring "Lift Yourself" to GA with me? The Ultimate Boss (talk) 16:27, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

The Ultimate Boss Yes I would be up for helping out with that, two questions though; do you want one of us to be a co-nominator and when should the article be brought to GAN status? --K. Peake 19:53, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

You are a away better editor, so I can be the co-nominater. I’m going to start editing the article today and want to bring it up to GA status by next Monday. The Ultimate Boss (talk) 19:58, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

The Ultimate Boss That is understandable and I have a free wiki schedule in this time period to allow me time to work on this article; I will help improve what you have added and include more information since I obviously know a lot about West and his music, does that sound good? Another question I have that has come to mind after you decided to work on this article with me is are you a fan of West's music? I know you like Billie Eilish and I haven't told you before, but I am a fan of her work too, especially When We All Fall Asleep, Where Do We Go?. --K. Peake 20:02, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

My brother showed me the song and I thought it was very funny. I’m starting to like Kanye and his music way more now. And if your interested, Billie just released a new single today called Therefore I Am. You should give into a listen! The Ultimate Boss (talk) 20:06, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

The Ultimate Boss Will you be making sure to contribute properly during today and tomorrow so you can co-nominate? --K. Peake 06:38, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

I'm working on the article right now. The Ultimate Boss (talk) 06:53, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

The Ultimate Boss That is good, but are you willing to cover info about the lyrics for the second section or should I start doing this; actual composition has been finished? --K. Peake 10:53, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

I added stuff about the lyrics. The Ultimate Boss (talk) 07:36, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

The Ultimate Boss Yeah I just saw that now and made some finishing touches to the section, good job on your part. I'll nominate now and put you as co-nominator, but don't feel afraid to reach out if you wish for the nomination to be retracted or have any other queries. --K. Peake 07:56, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of No More Parties in LA

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article No More Parties in LA you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zmbro -- Zmbro (talk) 21:21, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of No More Parties in LA

The article No More Parties in LA you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:No More Parties in LA for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zmbro -- Zmbro (talk) 19:41, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Love Lockdown

The article Love Lockdown you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Love Lockdown for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lirim.Z -- Lirim.Z (talk) 07:01, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of No More Parties in LA

The article No More Parties in LA you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:No More Parties in LA for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zmbro -- Zmbro (talk) 19:41, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Lift Yourself

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Lift Yourself you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of LOVI33 -- LOVI33 (talk) 15:01, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

October 2020 GAN Backlog drive

		The Good Article Reviewer's Medal of Merit
		Thank you for conducting 30 reviews in the October 2020 GAN Backlog drive. Your work helped us to reduce the backlog by over 48%. Regards, Eddie891 Talk Work 14:25, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

@Eddie891: Thank you for the medal, I am proud that I reviewed more in the period of one month than I did in the period of two months for the drive prior to the above one! --K. Peake 16:59, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Lift Yourself

The article Lift Yourself you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Lift Yourself for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of LOVI33 -- LOVI33 (talk) 17:01, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Lift Yourself

The article Lift Yourself you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Lift Yourself for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of LOVI33 -- LOVI33 (talk) 17:21, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Congrats! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:27, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Another Believer Thank you, it is quite good to see your interest in helping improve West's articles even as someone that is not too fussed for his work; do you plan on potentially reviewing any of them in the future when more nominations are up? --K. Peake 17:32, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Kyle Peake, I don't review Good article nominations, generally speaking, but of course articles I've created are on my radar. So, if you expand stubs I've created for his other songs, I'll be around! Keep up the great work. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:34, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

BTW, I'm crediting your work here! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:38, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Another Believer That is understandable, never feel afraid to leave any suggestions if something sticks out to you! Also you giving me credit for any of the good articles I promoted is definitely great, but it looks like you have missed one in "No More Parties in LA". --K. Peake 17:41, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Kyle Peake, Oh, great! Sorry, not sure how that fell through the cracks. Updating now... ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:50, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Updated, and I added User:The Ultimate Boss as a co-nom for Lift Yourself. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:55, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Another Believer My pleasure with the reminder, and thank you for crediting the co-nominator where it is well and truly deserved! --K. Peake 18:53, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Kyle Peake, Keep on trucking, and good luck with your next expansions/noms. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:44, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Another Believer Do you plan on nominating more articles for GA status in the future yourself? If yes, I may be willing to review some! --K. Peake 21:20, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Kyle Peake, Davis Street Tavern will likely be my next, since my other 2 local restaurant articles just got picked up for review (those go quickly!). Not quite ready though. I've co-nominated Gigi Goode, if you're interested in reviewing a short bio. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:23, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

I've nominated Davis Street Tavern, if you enjoy reviewing such articles. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 02:31, 24 November 2020 (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) 02:58, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Fade (Kanye West song)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Fade (Kanye West song) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of LOVI33 -- LOVI33 (talk) 22:01, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Fade (Kanye West song)

The article Fade (Kanye West song) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Fade (Kanye West song) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of LOVI33 -- LOVI33 (talk) 21:41, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Fade (Kanye West song)

The article Fade (Kanye West song) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Fade (Kanye West song) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of LOVI33 -- LOVI33 (talk) 15:21, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 4th Dimension (song)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 4th Dimension (song) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Ultimate Boss -- The Ultimate Boss (talk) 06:21, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

The Ultimate Boss Do you have any updates on this since it has been over a week and you have yet to start reviewing this article? --K. Peake 15:55, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

uDiscoverMusic.com

Hello!

There was a discussion see here regarding the reliability of the source and despite the contributors of the site being people that have worked in music magazines and everything in between, there is a consensus that it should be used "sparingly" only in "in depth feature" articles, which reviews of albums are not. It states "uDiscoverMusic.com is operated by Universal Music Group, the largest record label in the world and home to the greatest artists in history." You can see that on their about us page 1. At the best, the sources is quite bias and there is a huge conflict of interests. Could you please remove said source from the Kids See Ghosts articles?

Kind regards, MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 13:05, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

MarioSoulTruthFan Thank you for the notification and I have removed the source from all of the articles, any other issues to point out? --K. Peake 14:11, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. On a quick glance everything else seems fine, keep up the good work! Not sure if it is featured on other articles you have edited, but you know what to do if so. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 14:25, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

FA

I was wondering if you would want to co-nominate "Lift Yourself" as a Featured Article with me? The Ultimate Boss (talk) 17:31, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

The Ultimate Boss The idea sounds good on paper, but are you sure the article has enough material to become a FA? Also, you have not replied to me about "4th Dimension" still; what is happening with the review? --K. Peake 17:48, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

I think the article has really reliable sources to make us nominate it. I have also passed the article. Sorry it took so long, I was really busy with school and my birthday was a few days ago. The Ultimate Boss (talk) 17:57, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

The Ultimate Boss It would be better to put it up for a peer review first, as that is a general procedure in the steps to nominating an article for FA status. Also thank you for passing the article despite the delay and happy belated birthday! --K. Peake 18:04, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 4th Dimension (song)

The article 4th Dimension (song) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:4th Dimension (song) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Ultimate Boss -- The Ultimate Boss (talk) 18:02, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Cups FA

Hi Kyle, I am planning on retiring from Wikipedia to focus on my college career and probably start a music career, but before I go, I want to make Cups (song) a featured article. I was wondering if you put up a review for the nomination? I consider you a really experience editor and would love yo see what you have to say about the article. If you can't, I totally understand. Thanks a lot! The Ultimate Boss (talk) 07:16, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

The Ultimate Boss Thank you for consulting me and yes, I will put up a review for the nomination. It will probably be later today though, as I have a GA review to complete first as well as some ventures irl. --K. Peake 08:59, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

The Ultimate Boss I have left my comments right now as you will see on the candidate page, though I may expand "Lift Yourself" further than my edit from earlier today later on, for your information! --K. Peake 13:54, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Kyle! It was always a pleasure working with you! I’m really going to miss you when I leave... The Ultimate Boss (talk) 07:03, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Citing blogs, neo-Nazi or otherwise.

I see you once again restored the Greg Johnson (white nationalist) blog post to Water (Kanye West song). I have no idea what you meant by "restore until proven unreliable". That's not how WP:RS works, and you are experienced enough that you should already know that. The source is not reliable. I don't know how many ways to explain this to you. The only people who bothered to comment at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 318#Counter-Currents.com for music agreed that its not reliable. You had a chance to defend this source (for whatever reason) and you didn't. Waiting it out and then stealth reverting was not appropriate.

Citing a racist blog for information about Black musician is bad, but blogs are not reliable in general. This is basic stuff. Don't cite WP:UGC/WP:SPS even if you think it's useful, or if you personally agree with it. That's just hiding your own WP:OR behind ref tags. You cannot not expect every single unreliable source to be "proven unreliable". I hope this one fringe source is an anomaly, because if you are adding other unreliable sources to articles with this level of tenacity and stubbornness, sooner or later, this behavior will need to be dealt with at ANI.

Let me repeat this: You had an opportunity to explain why it was appropriate to cite this source at RSN. You did not explain this and instead dropped the discussion completely. Then, you waited a while and restored the source anyway. Restoring a terrible source after the discussion has been archived is indistinguishable from gaming the system. Don't do that again, and use better sources from now on. Grayfell (talk) 07:58, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Grayfell I admit that the source was not reliable and apologize after I have seen this in hindsight, though if you are removing it from the articles then you should be removing the info backed up by it because otherwise that is definitely leading to WP:OR, ironically. Also, I did offer discussion if you look back at the talk page, even if you were in disagreement with what I pointed out. I have not been adding blogs as sources on a regular basis; I am fully aware that sites like Medium are unreliable and do not use them after I have learnt this. Sorry if you have been so highly offended by my mistake, I will not repeat it and if you think otherwise you can check through my articles to see the proof. --K. Peake 08:07, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Talk pages are for discussion. I responded at RSN, and you stopped participating in the discussion. I don't know why you thought it was okay to restore the source, nor at this point do I particularly care. "Sorry if you have been so highly offended" is not an apology, and it suggests you think it's my fault for not letting you get away with it. You're the one who added Nazi crap to Wikipedia, and then restored it over several months. How "offended" I am makes no difference. Grayfell (talk) 08:22, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Grayfell I made it very clear I will not be restoring the source again and I have not unveiled this information previously, but at the time I was unaware it was a neo-Nazi blog and of course I oppose such horrendous groups like you do. I did not get round to replying at RSN after my initial comments because I forgot, due to being very busy with other ventures on Wiki and I probably should have checked. It did seem like you thought I was behaving very poorly by noting "tenacity and stubbornness", which is why I wrote the highly offended part, not because it is your fault since that is far from being the case. I edit on here to help make the site a better place and I am willing to accept constructive criticism as you have delivered, though everybody makes mistakes and we grow from them, as the great Kanye West once said. We good now? --K. Peake 08:29, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Clearly you were not unaware. For one, this this edit summary shows that you understood what the source was. For another, I explained that it was a neo-Nazi blog every time I removed it, and again at the RSN board. You also must've seen the wikilink which includes the words "white nationalist". You apparently either completely ignored that or didn't care until now. Instead of responding demonstrate your growth by your actions. Grayfell (talk) 08:44, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Grayfell I did not call it a neo-Nazi blog in that summary, I merely said this was not a political or racial page; that means I believed the source had bias for those subjects, not that it was from a neo-Nazi group. As for the edit summary, I must have got mixed up in my response to that which I am sorry for; this type of thing often happens when editors are dealing with many things on this site. White nationalist is not the same as neo-Nazi to your point and I am a very experienced editor, who has not only responded with a sincere apology but shown I will be unwilling to use the source again or any similar ones, how does that not show growth? This is one of the few occasions when I have been incorrect on Wiki in 2020 and you are behaving as if I lack maturity or proper regret of my actions, which is unfair being that I have properly explained myself and shown on many other occasions my true strength as an editor... are you willing to understand that I have moved away from the mistake? --K. Peake 08:59, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

If I hadn't brought this up, I have every reason to believe you would have eventually restored the source yet again. The first law of holes applies. White nationalist is not the same as neo-Nazi. That's the reason I started this discussion here. It is not okay to cite blogs, white nationalist or otherwise, but the words "white nationalist" really should've caused you to slow down and look a little close.

Unfortunately, neither one of us can say with confidence that this is one of the few occasions you have been incorrect. As I said, demonstrate your growth by your actions, not your words. Grayfell (talk) 23:01, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Grayfell Well if you look at how highly respected I've been across this site, it should be clear this is one of the few occasions. The fact that I have now edited those two articles by restoring the information as best as possible by using different sourcing shows I have grown from my actions and I wouldn't have restored it again per WP:EDITWAR, maybe you'd have a chance of being as respected as me on this site if you weren't so rude. --K. Peake 07:12, 11 December 2020 (UTC)