User talk:Doggy54321/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Regarding removing music video views information under "Trivia"

I have noticed you doing this a few times now on a couple of the Olivia Rodrigo articles, most notably on "Good 4 U" where you have removed music video views under the reason of 'trivia' several times now. It may not add anything important to the article, but it's just a little bit of fun information that people can update every so often. I carefully looked at the WP:Trivia article for anything which may say that music video views should be removed. Nothing about it says that, heck if you look at loads and loads of different song articles, pop or rock. A lot of them will have a standard of "As of ...., the song has ... million views on YouTube." Heck, I even negotiated with that standard for the three music video views for the singles to make it feel like it fits in more with the information to the article with a direct reference with a link to the music video to satisfy you more so with it in terms of that different structure. With the removal of that, I feel I need to express a different viewpoint to you of what I'm admitedly a bit frustrated about. Edit warring isn't allowed on Wikipedia, things shouldn't be removed unless its for good reason which has broken site wide rules on specific edits. Everyone I've seen who are more experienced as Wikipedia editors have zero issue with music video views being included on articles, apart from yourself. If you account for streams on streaming platforms, that's when I would agree with removing those numbers unless the streaming tally has significance to the actual article. I don't agree with you removing such things like music video views as it's such a pointless and silly thing to remove in my honest opinion. Many thanks, I hope you can understand and maybe allow me to add them back in with no interruption.--Rockmusicfanatic20 (talk) 23:38, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

@Rockmusicfanatic20: Hi! Yes, I did do that, and have been doing that for months, due to the fact that it is trivia. When I say trivia, I am not talking about WP:Trivia, but I am more talking about the dictionary definition, which is details, considerations, or pieces of information of little importance or value. When you say It may not add anything important to the article, but it's just a little bit of fun information that people can update every so often, this indirectly makes you agree with the reason for my removal, which is that this is of little importance. I acknowledge that you think it is fun to have music video view counts in articles, but having fun should not affect what we include in articles.

Moving on, I am a bit confused with what you're saying. You say A lot of [pages] will have a standard of 'As of ...., the song has ... million views on YouTube', however I do not remember consensus being made to include view counts, which is what I interpret your use of the word "standard" to mean. Then, you go on to say that you negotiated with the standard (once again, what standard?) for the three music videos, which I am assuming are "Drivers License", "Deja Vu" and "Good 4 U", to make it (it being the view count, I presume) feel like it fits in more with the information in the articles. Making the view counts fit in was never the issue, it is that they are useless and unimportant pieces of information. You also say with a direct reference with a link to the music video to satisfy you more so with it in terms of that different structure. It is on you to provide a reliable source to all the information you add to articles, so I am not clear why you said "with a link to…satisfy you", as if I am the only one who cares about this.

With the removal of that, I feel I need to express a different viewpoint to you of what I'm admitedly a bit frustrated about – I'm sorry to hear that you're frustrated. If you're frustrated by this, I think it would be best if you take a day or two to cool down, collect your thoughts, and come back to this discussion with a clear mind. I understand your viewpoint, and I thank you for checking in to make sure.

Edit warring isn't allowed on Wikipedia, things shouldn't be removed unless its for good reason which has broken site wide rules on specific edits – I agree, removing something without explanation makes it really hard to decide whether you agree or disagree with that edit. However, I was not edit warring, but if I didn't adequately explain why, I apologize. I went into more detail above, if that helps.

Everyone I've seen who are more experienced as Wikipedia editors have zero issue with music video views being included on articles, apart from yourself – Well, I am providing a reason why these should not be included, so maybe it's time to open up a discussion on this.

I don't agree with you removing such things like music video views as it's such a pointless and silly thing to remove in my honest opinion – I don't agree. If I find a piece of information that I think shouldn't be in an article, I will remove it, provided there is no previous consensus. If you think it's pointless and silly, that's fine, but it's a single edit that barely takes 30 seconds, so I do not feel the same way.

To sum all of this up: please clarify what you mean where I have asked for clarification, and please do not be hesitant to step away from this discussion if needed. Lastly, please respond to my comments as you see fit. Additionally, I would like you to read WP:ONUS, as that is another big part of my argument. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 00:19, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Higher Power & Coldplay Xtra

Coldplay released an acoustic version and some remixes of Higher Power, that should be included in a tracklist section no? Just asking. As for Coldplay Xtra, they are trustworthy and the band themselves keep in touch with the team. I think they can be used as a source (at least temporarily or to talk about fan-related matters). GustavoCza (talk) 22:10, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

@GustavoCza: Oh, I didn't know that. I will add those extra releases (provided I find sources for them) and restore the track listing section. While the band may keep in touch with Coldplay Xtra, Wikipedia has a guideline on using social media as a source (WP:SOCIALMEDIA), and Coldplay Xtra fails that guideline, so it still cannot be used. As well, I don't think any fan-related matters that aren't already covered in reliable sources should be added to the articles. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 22:12, 16 August 2021 (UTC) (updated 22:13, 16 August 2021 (UTC))

You can find the releases on Spotify and Apple Music. GustavoCza (talk) 22:18, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 22:19, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Lorde release dates

Hi, I noticed that you'd changed the date for Mood Ring's release to 18 August 2021, since that's when the song comes out in NZ. Would it be appropriate to move the release dates for Solar Power (the song, not the album) and Stoned at the Nail Salon forward a day as well? If I recall, they both came out at June 11 and July 22 in NZ, and just checking the MV and visualiser on YouTube, the release date shows up as that for me (I'm 2 hours behind NZ, so if the MV and visualiser were released within 2 hours of the single, they'd have been released the next day there). --LivelyRatification (talk) 23:56, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

@LivelyRatification: Yes, I think that would be appropriate. If we comply with the English and date variations of the nationality of the singer, it only makes sense to comply with the dates of the country of the singer as well. Because we use NZ English and dmy dates in Lorde's articles, it only makes sense to list the release dates in NZ time. NZDT (New Zealand Daylight Time) is UTC+13:00, so both Solar Power and Stoned were released on June 11 and July 22 in NZDT, respectively, and I would appreciate if they were changed to reflect that. I'm UTC-04:00, so the release dates show up as June 10 and July 21 for me, but that's because I'm 17 hours behind New Zealand. As well, depending on when it gets released, and if it will be a local release or not, the release date of the album could very well be amended to August 21, but we will have to wait and see. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 01:18, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

I'll fix the release dates for those two songs! I've read that Solar Power (the album) is a local release on social media, but, as you said, wait and see. --LivelyRatification (talk) 01:20, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

@LivelyRatification: Thanks so much! I've seen that too, and it makes sense when you consider the label the album is being released under. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 01:25, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

"Oxytocin"

Um, excuse me but I don't really get why you reverted my changes from "Oxytocin" article. I expanded it, maybe not with the best grammar choices, but still it was a huge expansion, which added various sources that were talking about this song exclusively. And like your edit summary said, I just expanded previously existing sections, adding a one, which was properly sourced too. infsai (dyskusja) 02:51, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

@Infsai: Hi! You did expand it, but you also replaced a lot of what was already there with the text from your version, which isn't helpful, because you're essentially just re-writing the page, and removing useful information in the process. What I was referring to in my edit summary is that, instead of doing what you did and replacing entire sections, find ways to integrate parts of your version into the current version. If you see that the writers of the song are already detailed, don't add your version of that into the article. But, if you see that there isn't really a detailed background on the song, but you have that in your version, add it in. It's really all about being creative. As well, if you see that a critical reception section with two reviews has been started, don't replace the section outright, but find a way to include the reviews that you have in your version that aren't in the article already. My decision to revert was solely based off of this, so I did not take into account the grammar or sourcing of your version. I hope this clears things up. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 03:00, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Um, I didn't re-write whole article, I only re-wrote few sentences in first section, to simply expand it more. I didn't remove any important informations, I actually added new ones. My edit summary might be wrongly sentences, because I simply had an idea to create article about this song, and today I noticed that it exists, so I decided to expand it with the sources I gathered. So I really don't see a point to remove my edit… infsai (dyskusja) 03:04, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

@Infsai: Oh. Maybe it's because I'm on mobile, but I noticed that you removed multiple paragraphs while adding other ones. I can't be sure whether the removed paragraphs are just implemented into the added ones (viewing edits on mobile, especially major edits like this, gets really hard to read sometimes), but it looks like you just removed them. Thank you for clarifying, and I apologize if I accused you of something you didn't do. Since I can't be 100% sure and check myself, if you really didn't remove any paragraphs, then I would say it is fair to revert my edit. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 03:14, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Ok, no problem. It's kinda my fault too, since I really don't think of what I put in the edit summary, I guess I need to be more clear. And yeah, I get it, mobile view is awful. infsai (dyskusja) 03:18, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

@Infsai: Don't apologize! I admit it was a bit unclear, but once you explained it, I understood. Yes, I don't like it at all; it's one of the few downsides of editing on mobile. Lastly, I am confirming that I see that you have reverted my edit. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 03:21, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Last Great American Dynasty

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Last Great American Dynasty 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 GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 03:41, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Legacy section for Little Mix

Hey, not too sure what you might know about this but I’m not too sure on how close Little Mix are in eligibility to having a legacy section added to their main article. I saw some new contributions go up about their contribution to the return of girl-groups in the 2010’s, their chart success (particularly in Britain) as well I know they’ve influenced many girl-groups in recent years. So I was wondering, could this all be added to a legacy section? Or would there need to be better sourcing and information?

Any word would be appreciated!

Lmarmy (talk) 12:39, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

@Lmarmy: Hi! I agree that it's time Little Mix gets a legacy section. However, I know some of Wikipedia editors oppose these at first, because using the term "Legacy" is a little bit contentious. As a next step, you could start a rough legacy section in the article, using the points you just detailed above, and build consensus through that. Alternatively, you can take this to the talk page, and build consensus through that. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 13:48, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Little Mix

Hey there!

so i added on the HBA wiki page that it was from the girls upcoming greatest hits album as i am a mixer from 2013 but i had the thought that HBA was released as a single from Between US my bad i am sorry thanks for letting me know!

have a great day — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pow0017 (talk • contribs)

@Pow0017: Hi! Thank you so much for taking the time to clarify! That's completely fine, I had assumed it was an honest mistake. If you have any other questions or things you are uncertain of, please don't hesitate to ask me. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 02:37, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Last Great American Dynasty

The article The Last Great American Dynasty 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:The Last Great American Dynasty for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 16:41, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Hey!

Hey again! I have a quick question. I’m currently editing Lizzo’s new single Rumors, and I see that Cardi is credited as a featured artist on the article. Spotify credits her as a featured artist, However Apple Music credits her as a co-lead artist, and I think Apple Music is more reliable than Spotify, so I’m sticking to that and to credit cardi as a co-lead artist instead of credited as featured, and I plan to move the page to Rumors (Lizzo and Cardi B song). What do you think? PopLizard86427 (talk) 23:42, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

@PopLizard86427: Hi! In my opinion, streaming services shouldn't be used to determine features/co-lead artists, due to the fact that they are often inconsistent. They are also all of the same reliability, so Apple Music would not be more reliable than Spotify. However, there are multiple pieces of evidence that point to Cardi B being a feature, such as the various listings on Lizzo's official website (Lizzo's Single 'Rumors' featuring Cardi B). I always tend to look to the label/artist themselves when talking about features and co-lead artists, since they know what they're talking about, so, with my logic, Cardi should be listed as a feature, and the page should not be moved. However, I do think that you should bring this up at Talk:Rumors (Lizzo song), just in case the general consensus is to credit Cardi as a co-lead artist. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 00:34, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for removing my recent edit on Happier Than Ever. I removed that by accident and didn’t realize PopLizard86427 (talk) 19:06, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

@PopLizard86427: Hi! No problem, thank you for clarifying! D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 19:11, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thank you for your tireless contributions to Little Mix, Olivia Rodrigo, Taylor Swift, and other pop musician-related articles. Cheers! ɢᴀʙʙʏᴍɪx01 14:01, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

@GabbyMix01: Thank you so much!! I'm always happy to help :) Have a great day, and thank you again!! D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 15:08, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

We're "hurrying", apparently

I was just reverted on Halsey (singer) by the editor Amaury [1], who has claimed on one of their friend's talk pages that I'm "hurrying" to update Wikipedia with a fact. The insinuation here is that based on literally nothing other than a "no need to hurry" essay, we have to wait until it's midnight in the artist's home country until we can say an album has been released, which I'm sure you think is silly given some of your edits earlier. You can chip in at User talk:IJBall#Halsey (singer) if you want. Ss112 16:07, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

@Ss112: Thank you for the link, I commented there. I do think that is silly, considering the fact that the album has already been out for four hours. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 16:21, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I edited my original reply saying obviously I informed you about the discussion for posterity, although I can't see why it would be issue as I know for a fact those editors (IJBall and Amaury) each regularly inform the other about issues regarding edits on articles they have a mutual interest in. Ss112 16:28, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

I can't see it being an issue at all, but I noticed and I thank you for doing that. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 16:35, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Also, totally unrelated, but do you see any real notability with Blue Banisters (song), Text Book (Lana Del Rey song) and Wildflower Wildfire? Now, for sure, I think Blue Banisters is notable (or certainly will be when it gets closer to release), but none of the songs charted (aside from the title track, on the NZ Hot component chart) and the only real coverage I see on them is "Lana Del Rey released three new songs". Thoughts? Ss112 16:49, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

@Ss112: No, I do not see any real indication of notability. They look like carbon copies of each other, and they use the exact same sources. I think redirecting all three articles, while adding a paragraph or two to the album article, would be the best way to move forward. D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 16:55, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

The "Ya'aburnee" note in If I Can't Have Love, I Want Power

Thanks for your edit and reasoning. Basically all I wanted to do was correct the previous assertion that it means "You bury me" (which seems to be getting spread online) and help explain the real meaning, which I think is pretty important or else the song wouldn't have had an Arabic name.

Also I just included Ta'aburnee to help show people the difference between "(May) you bury me" (which they will see on other websites) and the actual title. That makes two related expressions, each with their own translation, I didn't really see where three conflicting translations comes in...

Anyway I put it back but without the last sentence (the one about grammar) which I guess might have been too much detail for a note, like you said. Is this okay? 73.169.192.130 (talk) 19:07, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi! The song uses the term to mean "You bury me" (in the lyric "I bury you as you bury me"), but I understood from the note the first time around that this wasn't 100% accurate. I think saying "'Ya'aburnee' (يقبرني) is an Arabic expression that roughly translates to 'You bury me'", while linking يقبرني to ar.wiktionary.org, so that we don't clutter the section with an explanation of a translation when readers can already find that on Wiktionary. How does this sound? Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 02:09, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Last Great American Dynasty

The article The Last Great American Dynasty you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:The Last Great American Dynasty for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 15:41, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Citation on List of Songs by Taylor Swift

Hi, I saw your message on my talk page referencing that the source I included wasn't considered reliable. However, it is the only source that has tangible information that can be linked within Wikipedia. The registration entries on the repertoires cannot be linked directly, even though they, in fact, exist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisharper13 (talk • contribs)

@Chrisharper13: Hi! Yes, I did do that. Self-published sources, such as Reddit, are usually considered unreliable. However, there are ways that you can source something without providing a direct link. You can just add a link to the general repertory search page and add a note saying something along the lines of "Enter 'Wildflower' in the 'title' search bar, 'Taylor Swift' in the 'performer' search bar, and press 'search'". As well, I checked the Spanish database, and the song shows up, but I couldn't find a listing on the Italian one. Moving forward, if you could a) check the Italian database and prove that a listing exists and b) add the information back into the article with the correct sourcing (like I showed you above), that would be great. If you need help doing this, I would be more than happy to help. As well, if you have any other questions, please don't hesitate to ask. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 14:02, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Help on I Still Have Faith in You

Hey Doggy. Would you be able to add I Still Have Faith in You to your watchlist? There's an editor named Coachtripfan who's been removing the New Zealand peak from the article (having removed it at least three times now), claiming that it's "misleading" to include another New Zealand chart other than the main one (the Top 40); that because the NZ Hot Singles Chart is not a "sales" chart we shouldn't include it; and also something about how it's not "official" despite it being published by the official chart publisher of New Zealand. They're not seeing reason and don't look likely to stop and it seems a bit early to go to WP:AN/EW or an admin. They're also opening threads on the article's talk page half-all caps ranting about whatever. Thanks if you can help. Ss112 11:55, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

@Ss112: Hi! I have added the article to my watchlist, however I haven't been very active in the past week. But, I will definitely still try to help in any and all ways that I can. Thank you for reaching out! D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 13:10, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

All Too Well

Hi! You redirected All Too Well (short film). I reverted it because I think it has sufficient coverage. Please participate in the discussion I started on its talk page. Thanks! Ronherry (talk) 06:17, 6 November 2021 (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) 00:55, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

DYK for I Bet You Think About Me

On 5 December 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article I Bet You Think About Me, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the music video to "I Bet You Think About Me" by Taylor Swift is co-written and directed by Blake Lively in her directorial debut? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/I Bet You Think About Me. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, I Bet You Think About Me), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Editors (namely Dangerouspositions) recreating Familia (Camila Cabello album)

You might want to be on alert for this. Dangerouspositions has recreated a terrible version of Familia at the article twice now. Ss112 23:17, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up! D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 05:48, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello!

Please join this convo: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music#AllAccess_radio :) Tree Critter (talk) 07:16, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Third anniversary on Wikipedia

Hey, Doggy54321. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 20:25, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

New message from Jo-Jo Eumerus

Hello, Doggy54321. You have new messages at File talk:Beyoncé - Break My Soul-en.png.
Message added 14:54, 27 June 2022 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:54, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

I need your help!

Hey! How are you?? I'm writing because I need help and I'd like you to help me with this article! I'm making a mess and I don't know why! Thank you so much! MikaelEmanuelsson (talk) 19:32, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:...Ready for It? - Taylor Swift.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:...Ready for It? - Taylor Swift.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:02, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Hey!

Hi! Just wanna compliment you for adding the track titles for Midnights. You are really quick! PopLizard (talk) 04:02, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

@PopLizard: Thank you so much!! D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 04:50, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Doggy54321,
Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia, and a Happy New Year to you and yours! Rikripley (talk) 04:54, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

---

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

– Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year}} to user talk pages.

Rikripley (talk) 04:54, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

"Midnight Rain (Taylor Swift song)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Midnight Rain (Taylor Swift song) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 16 § Midnight Rain (Taylor Swift song) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Tantomile (talk) 09:34, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Help...

Hi...I'm new around here and I was told that you can help me...Please can you assist me on how to use Wikipedia...Please 🙏 Knjh (talk) 22:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

June 2023

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, you may be blocked from editing. livelikemusic (TALK!) 04:11, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Talk:The_Storm_Before_the_Calm#Euro_label

Share your thoughts regarding the album if you wish to. 2001:D08:2930:E566:3016:9A76:851F:F101 (talk) 10:31, 9 June 2023 (UTC)