Hello, Tbhotch! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! fetchcomms 04:09, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
The legal name is Caral Civilization stated by the Peruvian Government (Ministry of Culture). There is no consensus needed anyone can not change the legal name.Jjrt (talk) 05:43, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
The most common name is Caral Civilization because it's used in any translated materials for tourist who came to Peru. Moreover, before to done my changes I read the talk page about, there I got many section referring to this topic: Talk:Norte_Chico_civilization#Archaeology Talk:Norte_Chico_civilization#An_issue_with_the_title_of_the_english_version_of_this_article No one has pointed out any argument in opposition to those points even though a long time passed, I guess you had no way of knowing that. According to Wikipedia:Consensus#In_talk_pages: Consensus can be assumed if no editors object to a change. Therefore, my changes could not be considered as a "No consensus". Consequently, I did it again but I couldn't move the page, I would appreciate it that you to respect that I followed the rules and help me to move the article again. Jjrt (talk) 08:05, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
There was consensus, because no one had pointed out any argument against in the previos sections, in Talk:Norte_Chico_civilization#Caral_Civilization I summarized that situation. I explained in detail my actions, nevertheless you persist in arguing that your reversion was right. On the other hand, I removed this note that you keep removing because it was wrote as it were personal opinion blog, something that Wikipedia is not, I will rewrite that reference properly.Jjrt (talk) 20:38, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Please stop your attacks
I kindly ask you to read and check the references, there is not defamation. Everything that was written in the note happened and was supported by the proper sources: News (one of the most read in Peru),formal Peruvian government claims and public apologized by Haas/Creamer, which follows Reliable, Wikipedia:Reliable_sources and Wikipedia:Verifiability. There is not my point of view, every adjective I wrote was taken from the sources (news and formal communications). I kindly ask you to stop your personal attacks, use the proper talk to argue something about is wrote in the article.
Your are breaking most of those rules Disruptive editing:
Is tendentious: repeatedly removing reliable sources posted by other editors. The note I submitted was supported by reliable sources
Cannot satisfy Wikipedia:Verifiability; fails to cite sourcesThe note you submitted don't have any source.
Does not engage in consensus building:You don't ask explanations or complaing before to act.
a. repeatedly disregards other editors' questions or requests for explanations concerning edits or objections to edits;
b. repeatedly disregards other editors' explanations for their edits.Jjrt (talk) 22:14, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
I ask you to clarify what you mean, up to now I assume good faith about this phrase : Y no te la vas a acabar perro. Regarding the article, before taking drastic actions, I prefer to reach a consensus. I kindly ask you that you pointed out which part or parts you consider defamatory or disruptive edits:
Ruth Shady was surprised by Jonathan Haas y Winifred Creamer, (Redacted) based on that, they renamed Norte Chico civilization as it were their investigation when it was not, also they placed and parallel investigation to Shady's investigations most of what is based on Shady's investigation without giving her the credits. Jonathan Haas y Winifred Creamer apologized to Shady, nevertheless, they persisted without recognizing the credit of Shady's investigation. Shady was supported and Haas/Creamer were firmly questioned by the Peruvian government, descendants of ancient cultures in question, Peruvian and USA societies of archeology and culture.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7]
It started between 1999 and 2000, Jonathan Haas y Winifred Creamer offered to help her to get financial support from USA organizations in favor of Shady's investigation in Caral, in that way, Haas proposed to Shady wrote a joint article arguing that this article would become a short way of getting financing. Unfortunately, the article was published (2001) only mentioning Jonathan Haas y Winifred Creamer, when the media covered the event of the presentation about the article they did not mention Shady as the chief of the project and co-author of the article, moreover, they let the media supposed that they were the discoverers of Caral. Shady protested about this (Redacted), consequently, the article was amended but the damage was done.Ruth Shady, openly denounced in 2005 the (Redacted) actions between Jonathan Haas y Winifred Creamer, because they tried to appropriate the authority of the Caral investigations. Immediately, she was supported by the Peruvian government (owner of any historical place in Peru) which sent official letters to the Society for American Archeology claiming punishment to Haas/Creamer because of their unethical behavior, also press communication was released from Peruvian Ministries of Education and of Foreign Relations.Haas and Creamer apologized to Shady about the (Redacted) Caral investigations, nevertheless, they persisted in a parallel investigation in surrounding places based on Shady jobs without given her the credits. Regarding this situation Betty Meggers (Smithsonian Institution) in an official mail to the National Geographic Society sentenced: "The fact that Haas and Creamer are accessible to the media and speak English has facilitated their usurpation of credit for identifying early urbanism on the coast of Peru, with its revolutionary implications for theories of the evolution of complex society."Local Institutions that supported Shady, rejected Haas/Creamer behavior and their publications:- Barranca Province (Peruvian regional government, geographically comprehended by Supe and Pativilca)- Supe Port District (Peruvian city government)- Board of Users of the Supe Valley (Heirs and descendants of an ancient culture placed in the north of Peru)- Peruvian archeologist society. -->Jjrt (talk) 22:36, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Once again, I ask you to clarify the meaning of this phrase : Y no te la vas a acabar perro. On the other hand, regarding Haas and Creamer the Peruvian government firmly wrote[8]: * ILLEGAL: "intento de apropiación ilicita de la propiedad intelectual" "the attempted illicit appropriation of intellectual property" * UNETHICAL: "Nuestra posición es de total rechazo a este tipo antiético de comportamiento." "Our position is of total rejection of this type of unethical behavior.". By the time of this communication Haas and Creamer were in Peru and did not take any legal action against no one (the Peruvian government or some else). As I explained the terms follow: Reliable, Wikipedia:Reliable_sources and Wikipedia:Verifiability. Jjrt (talk) 01:46, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
Ruth Shady made a public denouncement in January 2005, because Jonathan Haas and Winifred Creamer appropriated her investigations[9], she admitted that was surprised by them.
It started between 1999 and 2000, Jonathan Haas y Winifred Creamer offered to help her to get financial support from USA organizations in favor of Shady's investigation in Caral, in that way, Haas proposed to Shady wrote a joint article arguing that this article would become a short way of getting financing, the input to the article from Haas/Creamer was only radiocarbon dating of ancient rest. The article was published (2001) only mentioning Jonathan Haas y Winifred Creamer, when the media covered the event of the presentation about the article they did not mention Shady as the chief of the project and the main author of the article, moreover, they let the media supposed that they were the discoverers of Caral. Shady protested about this situation, consequently, Haas/Creamer apologized to Shady by letter and the article was amended[10], but the damage was done the press published as if Haas were the discover[11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22]. As a consequence, the professional relationship between Ruth Shady and Haas/Creamer was broken.
After those events, Haas/Creamer received financial support, and based on Shady's investigations, they renamed Caral Civilization as Norte Chico civilization as it were their investigation when it was not, also they placed and parallel investigation to Shady's investigations most of what is based on Shady's investigation without giving her the credits[23][24][25][26][27][28][29]. Jonathan Haas and Winifred Creamer apologized to Shady again, nevertheless, they persisted without recognizing the credit of Shady's investigation[30]. Shady was supported and Haas/Creamer were firmly questioned by:
The Peruvian government (owner of any historical place in Peru) on 06 January 2005 claimed "our position is of total rejection of this type of unethical behavior"[31] and claiming punishment to Haas/Creamer.
Betty Meggers to the National Geographic Society on 10 January 2005 wrote in an official letter "The fact that Haas and Creamer are accessible to the media and speak English has facilitated their usurpation of credit for identifying early urbanism on the coast of Peru, with its revolutionary implications for theories of the evolution of complex society. They deserve the opportunity to defend themselves, but the damage has been done."
Descendants of ancient cultures in question, 25 January 2005 claimed "It is not possible that offensive behavior, we reiterate our most energetic rejection of such publications."[32]
Barranca Province (Peruvian regional government, geographically comprehended by Supe Puerto and Pativilca) on 12 January 2005 claimed "We reiterate our strongest rejection of those publications (Haas/Creamer)"[33]
Supe Puerto (Peruvian city government) to Shady"our solidarity support ... regarding the actions and versions issued by Haas / Creamer"
Peruvian Society of Archeologists on 22 August 2005 argued "rejection of any kind of appropriation of the intellectual property of Shady's discoveries and censors any improper attempt of the results of her research."[34]
Michael E. Moseley from the University of Florida wrote to Shady: "Unfortunately, Haas et al, as newcomers with parallel data, are gaining international credit for work, data, and interpretations that you pioneered. Unfortunately, what is happening here in general is that Haas with his considerable resources has launched a massive Public Relations Campaign in the English press and journals to claim the basics of your discoveries as his own. This is Academic Imperialism of the first order!."[35]
1) The proper explanation needs that too long. 2) As you notice the problem is not only about the name, the new name was the way for Haas/Creamer for financial support and later parallel project, without recognizing Shady's investigation. The investigations are the only valid input to Caral civilization article. 3) The section Norte Chico civilization#Research should be the proper place for this text, considering that this text is detailed. I re-wrote the text considering most of yours, avoiding the repetitions (notice that Haas/Creamer apologized 2 different times and persisted 3 different times, something near to "el chavo")
Ruth Shady said that Jonathan Haas and Winifred Creamer had appropriated her investigations saying she felt "surprised" by their actions. The dispute started in 2000[36] when Jonathan Haas y Winifred Creamer offered to help her to get financial support from USA organizations in favor of Shady's investigation in Caral, in that way, Haas proposed to Shady wrote a joint article arguing that this article would become a short way of getting financing, the input to the article from Haas/Creamer was only radiocarbon dating of ancient rest[37]. The article was published in April 2001 only mentioning Jonathan Haas y Winifred Creamer as authors, when the media covered the event of the presentation about the article they did not mention Shady as the chief of the project and the main author of the article, moreover, they let the media supposed that they were the discoverers of Caral. Shady protested about this situation, consequently, Haas/Creamer apologized to Shady by letter and the article was amended[38], but the damage was done the press published as if Haas were the discover.[39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50] As a consequence, the professional relationship between Ruth Shady and Haas/Creamer was broken.
After those events, Haas/Creamer received financial support, and based on Shady's investigations, they placed and parallel investigation and renamed Caral Civilization as Norte Chico civilization, but most of what is based on Shady's investigation and theories without giving her the credits[51][52][53][54][55][56][57].
In January 2005, Shady openly denounced the actions between Haas and Creamer, because Jonathan Haas and Winifred Creamer appropriated her investigations and theories of the evolution of complex society[58], Jonathan Haas and Winifred Creamer apologized to Shady again, nevertheless, they persisted without recognizing the credit of Shady's investigation[59].
Shady was supported and Haas/Creamer were firmly questioned by the Peruvian government (owner of any historical place in Peru) on 06 January 2005 claimed "our position is of total rejection of this type of unethical behavior"[60] and claiming punishment to Haas/Creamer, also Ministry of Foreign Relations released a press cable. many other Peruvian institución did the same:
Barranca Province (Supe Puerto and Pativilca) supported Shady: "We reiterate our strongest rejection of those publications (Haas/Creamer)"[61]"our solidarity support ... regarding the actions and versions issued by Haas / Creamer"[62]
Peruvian Society of Archeologists argued "rejection of any kind of appropriation of the intellectual property of Shady's discoveries and censors any improper attempt of the results of her research."[63]
Descendants of ancient cultures in question, claimed "It is not possible that offensive behavior, we reiterate our most energetic rejection of such publications."[64]
Michael E. Moseley from the University of Florida supported Shady: "Unfortunately, Haas et al, as newcomers with parallel data, are gaining international credit for work, data, and interpretations that you pioneered. Unfortunately, what is happening here in general is that Haas with his considerable resources has launched a massive Public Relations Campaign in the English press and journals to claim the basics of your discoveries as his own. This is Academic Imperialism of the first order!."[65]
Regarding this situation, Betty Meggers (Director of Smithsonian Institution for Latin American) in an official mail to National Geographic Society wrote "The fact that Haas and Creamer are accessible to the media and speak English has facilitated their usurpation of credit for identifying early urbanism on the coast of Peru, with its revolutionary implications for theories of the evolution of complex society. They deserve the opportunity to defend themselves, but the damage has been done."[66]
I reasonably followed your all your recommendations, but here we have a majority who claimed their support to one side, moreover, I can't invent any support to Haas that don't exist. On the other hand, there are lots of books and scientific quotations in English that uses "Caral Civilization" or "Caral-Supe Civilization" I'm not inventing nothing, you can check by your self.Jjrt (talk) 21:18, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
Of course, there many news and books which refer "Norte Chico Civilization", Betty Meggers in her mail let readers know that the damages take long time effects. But, if you do the same research: "Caral-Supe Civilization"[[67]] 2,040 results for Shady. "Caral Civilization" [[68]] 31 results for Shady. "Norte Chico Civilization"[[69]] 25 results for Haas/Creamer. So it's largely clear which author has the most used term in English, an inmediately title change is needed.Jjrt (talk) 21:58, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
Regarding which title, as a standardization it would be preferable Caral Civilization as it was named in Spanish, but with redirection Caral-Supe Civilization :-| .Jjrt (talk) 22:16, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
I know that Wikis are independent, for this reason, I wrote it would be preferable. The official goberment page on english calls it "Caral Civilization" referring to the civilization, "The Sacred City of Caral-Supe" to the place, and "Caral-Supe Archaeological Project" to the project name.[[70]], in that way I'm in favor of "Caral Civilization" title, which you support Caral Civilization or Caral-Supe Civilization and why?.Jjrt (talk) 23:12, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
Decade End Chart
Hello!
So, for example, the Wiki album page for Taylor's Fearless has it listed in the Decade End Chart, but its source is no longer visible, even under archive.
Should those broken sources be deleted on Taylor's? Or could we use them on Rihanna's Good Girl Gone Bad. If you could find a Billboard archive that actually works, that would be great! I tried. Piratetales (talk) 03:18, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
Hailee Steinfeld
Hi Tbhotch!
I wanted to tell you about something that is happening in Hailee Steinfeld's article.
There is an IP address that you have edited 12 times in 3 days so far.
The issue is about her height, I put a font in which she claims to measure 5'6 "and he is determined that it is 5'8" since that's the official.
She herself affirms 5'6, therefore she does not stop adding false information repeatedly, I think that has a crime in Wikipedia.
She now she says that her height should not be listed.
Steinfeld is a model, therefore she knows her height and is relevant.
I wanted to tell you, because I think that measures should be taken with that IP, maybe it should be blocked some week.
I don't know how it will be done here, but in Spanish Wikipedia when you make 3 false edits in less than 24 hours, that person ends up blocked.
Greetings Tbhotch :)
Thanks Tbhotch!
I hope it arrives soon, because the article still does not have the semi-protection, and the IP continues to insist with the false information.
Can you give it to yourself?
Or block that IP?
Hi Tbhotch! Sorry to bother you again, but there is a Wikipedian "it seems" who is accusing me of being a troublemaker in the "Hailee Steinfeld" article and that the real problem is me and not the IP ...
You see, I put two sources of truth from "Hailee Steinfeld" herself that
they already made it clear that he is not 5'8
One from her Twitter:
https://twitter.com/haileesteinfeld/status/978785185910026240
And the other you already know what it is:
She says this is where she lies and says 5'7, when she is actually 5'6:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSfjCG4V2GM
Well, apparently the true sources of the mouth and handwriting of "Hailee Steinfeld" herself are not worth it.
She prefers to put in the biography that she is 5'8, since there is a magazine that simply gives her the official height that she has never claimed to measure ...
That is false information Tbhotch, it could be considered a disinformation campaign, and that is serious.
Okay, it is simply a height, but in Wikipedia you should not lie with the height or anything, the sources have to be true.
Tbhotch, I need your help, I've been looking for real sources, like Twitter and that YouTube interview, working on it, and it turns out that all the work is going to be thrown away.
Just because of a disturbing IP and a Wikipedian who has seen the discussion after quite some time, and decided to give it the fake 5'8 ...
These things should not be allowed.
Tbhotch you know I have great respect for you, and if you yourself advise me to cease trying to get the truth out, I will cease.
I will give up the subject for lost, because the official tentacles are too long, big and strong 😔
But she believed that the idea of wikipedia was to be as authentic as possible.
Tbhotch if you can help me, help me🙏
It is clear that I alone can not against this😔
Many thanks for assessing the Spitting Image article and raising it from a "stub" to a C-level article. However, I also noted that you checked the article against the B-level qualifications and noticed that you believed that there were either not enough or inadiquate citations used. I've done a fair bit of research (watched interviews, QnAs, official spotify statistics, tour diaries etc) and am unsure as to where you find an issue with the references. If possible, could you get back to me on what you found to be problematic with the citations and/or which citations were inadequate and I will try to find more/better replacements for them.
I know there was edit-conflicts in the most recent case, but I want to clarify that you shouldn't add new socks to closed cases. If an SPI clerk or admin marked it as closed, then there's nothing you can do about that, so go ahead and open a new case report. But if it's still open, then add new socks to it. Please don't reopen cases that were closed. The only time you should be changing a case status on any SPI is if you want to requst CU on an open case (an example would be here). Sro23 (talk) 08:21, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
OK. Thanks. (CC)Tbhotch™ 08:23, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Mulyadi Tamsir
This individual's status is cited in the article, and it was cited before I edited in the first time. Kindly read the BLP policy instead of introducing incorrect information ("is") despite a citation to the contrary. You may also do well to read WP:DTTR. Nyttend (talk) 20:54, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Please see WP:ANI#Tbhotch. Given your repeated abuse of the rollback tool in the last hour, I have requested that your rollback rights be removed. Nyttend (talk) 21:06, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Answer
Hi! To answer your question, speaking of Beyoncé, Drake and Mariah Carey used the term writer as short for songwriter. Israell (talk) 05:53, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
XIMENA NAVARRETE
Hello I have dedicated myself to making my contribution to the biography of Ximena Navarrete because I know her father, he and I are of the same age. Ximena's grandfather, Don Ramón Navarrete was from Michoacán, especially from Sahuayo, and his grandmother, Doña Alicia Salmón, from Guadalajara. Carlos, his sisters and brothers were born and raised in Michoacán until the family moved to Jalisco for their university studies. In fact, he and I were at the University of Guadalajara from 1980 to 1985, he studied dentistry and I studied law. In fact, it is known about the Michoacan origin of Ximena through statements that she gave to the magazine "TV Novelas" in October 2011, she mentioned that she feels proud to be from Guadalajara and to have Michoacan descent. With my participation in this article I only intend to show a relevant fact of Ximena's life, my intentions are good. I hope and please allow me to post my contribution. Thank you. Lic. Ernesto Villegas (talk) 00:15, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Edit requests
Hi - your edits here forgot to mark the request as answered (which is mildly annoying as then it remains in the queue, which is already long enough). I'd suggest using a script, like the one I am using, to avoid this kind of little mistake happening.
Can we discuss your issues here first. I'm a new wikipedia user, please clarify things with me, thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.112.215.130 (talk) 19:51, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
If discussion's that big of a deal to you, you should've told me via message before you reported me — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.112.215.130 (talk) 20:08, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
You are not "new"; you've been editing for almost a year. You know policies and guidelines and you apply them (sometimes incorrectly, but still). The multiple reverts and lack of discussion, not only with me but with several editors, are always an indication that a one-on-one discussion is pointless. (CC)Tbhotch™ 20:15, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Raymix 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 SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 21:41, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
February 2021
Latest comment: 3 years ago16 comments10 people in discussion
Just curious, was there a specific issue you were referring to with this edit comment? -- RoySmith(talk) 22:42, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
BTW, have you ever considered being an admin? Then you could be part of the problem instead of just complaining about it :-) -- RoySmith(talk) 22:45, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
@RoySmith: I am not an admin because there 50% of probability of becoming one. Do I need the tools? Yes, I do need them. Will I be trusted by the community with them? It's hard to know due to my sarcastic attitude. I said that because I reported 78.107.205.135 hereand Doggy reported them here (still not archived for some reason), and despite it was blatant vandalism and an obvious sockpuppet, it was still active editing when I said this the following day. Later I reported it here and the IP was blocked only after I reported them a third time. It's really frustrating when admins do not use their tools because the reported editor is not doing the pee-pee vandalism and the edits are more subtle and require more context to comprehend why it is false information, but also questions are rarely asked. (CC)Tbhotch™ 23:12, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
Tbhotch, Well, there's no doubt everything involving admins is backed up. SPI is certainly no exception; the queue at SPI is weeks long. The problem is there's not enough admins to do all the work. In any case, I've blocked the IP in question. See my comments here. -- RoySmith(talk) 23:38, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
sorry
sorry my friend from monterrey and gdl — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZT2000 (talk • contribs) 06:29, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Windows link — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZT2000 (talk • contribs) 06:35, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Pedro Pascal
The section I am removing is incorrect, his father was not at NYU and was never formally charged with anything.
Additionally, the paragraph does not describe anything that directly correlates to him as an individual, nor anything he was involved in. It is irrelevant information.
Finally, this page has been vandalized numerous times due to supporters of one of his co-stars trying to defame him. I have requested that his page be locked temporarily.
I will continue to delete said paragraph until his page is protected.
Pizzawithpepperonigoblin (talk) 22:59, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Revert
Hi. About this edit - diff. Could you please explain what do you mean?--Renat 18:23, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
FAC: Love for Sale
Hey, can you please comment on or review my nomination of Love for Sale (Bilal album)? It has not received new comments in a few weeks and is running close to the end, and there are reluctant takes on the sourcing in particular. And I am eager to just be done with it. The FA criteria is here at WP:FA?, if you choose to do so. Thanks. isento (talk) 13:04, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
Sorry, out of all the processes here, FAC is the least enjoyable. WP:CONTEXTMATTERS, yet they don't care. (CC)Tbhotch™ 19:44, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
Well, those comments would be appreciated and seem valuable if you choose to share them there. isento (talk) 20:55, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the comments. Do you have any further response to offer? isento (talk) 07:20, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 26
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1st Academy Awards, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph.
Latest comment: 3 years ago37 comments19 people in discussion
Amir Kulal
Hello Tbhotch, I think that Amir Kulal is Persian, because he and his tribe were comming from the Region Bukhara, where the big majority speaks and spoke Persian (Tajiki) for centuries. The majority there are Tajiks. And his last name is "Kulal", a Persian word, which means litteraly "pot" oder "potter".
I'm sorry if I was incorrect, it just made more sense to me, I hope you can explain to why he was Turkic if you got further knowledge about this topic :)
I just hadn't found any evidence that he could be Turkic heritage Gismo123123123 (talk) 21:20, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
The article Raymix 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:Raymix for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 02:02, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Deleted?
Nicki Minaj’s Pink friday sales are outdated, as they are based on older certifications, i’m simply updating them with their current sale status.
Also, Cardi B was accused of using radio payola by multiple sources when the song was released? i didn’t say it was true i said she was accused, which did happen, so why did you remove it? Kai875 (talk) 02:04, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
The article Raymix you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Raymix 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 SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 03:02, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Statue of Heydar Aliyev, Mexico City 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 Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 06:01, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
The article Statue of Heydar Aliyev, Mexico City you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Statue of Heydar Aliyev, Mexico City 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 Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 06:22, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Congrats! I've noted your accomplishment here and hope you'll work on some other CDMX public art articles soon! ---Another Believer(Talk) 15:59, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. I must admit that this review came out of the blue. (CC)Tbhotch™ 19:44, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, and I will continue editing Mexico City-related articles because they mostly are in the barebones. (CC)Tbhotch™ 19:47, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Glad to hear! I created a lot of the public art / monument stubs, so I will be following along and helping as possible. Happy editing! ---Another Believer(Talk) 19:49, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:IPN Seal.png
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:IPN Seal.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).
Hi. I still don't quite get why you changed "Various" to "Worldwide", but I just want to explain my point of view. I merged all of those 16 rows, since all of them were released the same day, and I left only one reference - Amazon - which is universal from what I know. I used the term "Various" since it's used in many articles ("We're Good", "Rain on Me", "Just Dance", andmore). I just want to know why my edit triggered you so much. infsai (dyskusja) 12:44, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
I thought that in Wikipedia everything should be as cohesive as it can, but okay. infsai (dyskusja) 17:07, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
@Infsai:Cohesiveness does not mean to repeat the mistakes from other pages. At least in Poker Face, you were the one that added the term. Both, "Poker Face" and "Marry the Night", at least, are WP:Good articles and good articles are required to be written in a "clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience". If the concept of clear is "obvious and leaving no doubt at all", what is the meaning of "Region: Various"? Southern United States, Central Asia, Micronesia, Europe, but not Australia, Southern Africa, Northern Brazil, Greenland and Alaska? "Various" is a vague word that should be reserved to infoboxes and lead paragraphs as you will explain later what you mean with "various" (i.e. "The album was recorded at various locations"). 17:21, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Nadia Ali
Hello. I reverted your revert of my edit on the page Nadia Ali (singer). Please read the section of life and career. It states that she was born in Libya to Pakistani parents who later immigrated to the United States. Thus she is a Pakistani-American. --184.146.212.5 (talk) 04:20, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
Alright, saw your link. Never mind. --184.146.212.5 (talk) 04:21, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
March 2020
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Super Straight. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.Please wait for other editors' thoughts on the talk page before continuing to edit.SWinxy (talk) 15:00, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi. I would like to retract my warning. You properly created a talk page and I mistakenly thought you were warring with a particular user. In my defense, the changes made by the other users were all identical (removing the hatnote), and you reverted all three. While this butts up against the 3RR, it doesn't outright violate it. I apologize. However, you should be a bit more lenient towards other users, and mention the ongoing discussion on the talk page. Plus, saying Am I speaking in Chinese? is a bit racist. Thank you. SWinxy (talk) 18:53, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
We are a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to Ricky Martin and his discography. If you would be interested in joining feel free to visit the Participants Page!
Thank You.
Hi Tbhotch, I completely understand why you reverted this edit, but this IP was actually correct. It was incorrectly changed to "C20" by an IP back in 2018. Best, Mr.choppers | ✎ 02:49, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
RE: RfPP "Done For the bot"
Hey. Your additions of {{rfpp|do}} are redundant. The bot will archive any requests with an rfpp template that signifies a protection outcome, or ones which are expressly declined. El_C 02:16, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Ah, I stand corrected. Deepfriedokra, in light of your fondness for an added note for protection requests, probably best to add these before rather than after whatever rfpp template is used, so that the bot's archiving will still be triggered. El_C 02:30, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
BTW, Tbhotch, it might only make an aesthetic difference vis-à-vis {{rfpp|do}} (not sure), but {{rfpp|ar}} is specifically designed for alerting the bot to archive any stale requests. El_C 02:42, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
I only use that when the bot gets unruly. In case anyone wants to comment. (CC)Tbhotch™ 03:23, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Ah, but you did forget {{rfpp|ap|ping-of-annoyance}} — because making friends = important. El_C 07:41, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Penelope Pussycat
Hello, I have not found any source that indicates her participation in the film, nor in the current Looney Tunes Cartoons series. Hyju (talk) 10:42, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
What I saw were fanarts, no website sources that say it appears, I prefer to wait.Hyju (talk) 22:55, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Hey! Just a heads up: please stop adding "POV" as a single from Positions (album) until there are reliable sources that state this. Headline Planet was deemed unreliable in not one but two discussions, one in August 2020 (Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Albums/Archive_62#Headline_Planet) and one in January 2021 (Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Albums/Archive_62#Headline_Planet_2). As well, even though Gary Trust writes for Billboard, his Twitter account violates WP:SOCIALMEDIA. Per SOCIALMEDIA, self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves. If Trust wants to write an article for Billboard saying that "POV" is a single, he can do so, but we can’t cite his Twitter account. Knowing all this, please halt trying to add "POV" as a single until reliable sources say it is a single. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321(let's chat!) 12:09, 24 March 2021 (UTC) (please ping on reply)
I don’t have access to that as it requires a login. Could you detail what is said in the source please? I’m assuming it’s a radio listing because it’s from All Access, but if you could clarify, that would be great. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321(let's chat!) 17:20, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
@Doggy54321: That one "ARIANA GRANDE pov; Move 280; Stat 24"; this one: "Top 40. Monitored Reporters. Last updated: Mar 23, 2021 at 3:30 PM. ARIANA GRANDE. pov. Republic. adds 81." (CC)Tbhotch™ 17:45, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Cool, thanks for clarifying. They are both sufficient sources to call the song a single. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321(let's chat!) 17:48, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Latest comment: 3 years ago20 comments14 people in discussion
mohun bagan ac
current board (some unneeded capital letters in positions). fix too please
Reforma
After considerable research, I went in and made some changes to the Reforma article. I even included a description of what changes I had made and why. The changes were immediately reverted because it "seems to be a test." I assure you, the changes were intentional, well-researched, and cited. Please reconsider or at least explain WHY a good-faith attempt to edit a page would be summarily reverted so I can avoid the issue going forward. Thanks. CapnPhantasm (talk) 21:05, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Apologies. I deleted the categories in my sandbox but didn't realize I had deleted them from the article itself. I'll be more careful going forward. Sorry for the confusion and thanks for the clarification! CapnPhantasm (talk) 21:17, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Don't Forget
(Redacted)
Whoever changed it, never changed that page. (CC)Tbhotch™ 20:59, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
You're right, I'm not new, but you are aware your edits restore original research and synthesis to the article - a little bit of WP:AGF wouldn't go a miss. I would expect us to both agree that a song needs explicit clarification of its release as a single. That means its needs to be serviced to radio versus simply picking up radio airplay, this is particularly evident especially after an album has come out and there is nothing to stop radio stations from playing album tracks. Anyway I commented at the Pov talkpage too. ≫ Lil-Unique1-{ Talk }- 21:42, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
This is a courtesy note given your username appears in some of the edit summaries. CMD (talk) 05:45, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Confetti as a single.
Didn’t you not see the talk page I made? Confetti is clearly a single from the album, despite being a remix. See their other songs Touch, How Ya Doin’, Think About Us, Power, and No More Sad Songs as examples. They got remixes and they are credited as singles off the album. DuaLipaFan23951 (talk) 16:38, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed that the page Alben Barkley is indefinitely semi-protected but is missing a protection icon. Since this seems to be something you do a lot, can and would you kindly fix that issue on that page? Clevesian (talk) 00:00, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
FYI, the "new" account taking such a lively interest in your work is a sock of CalebHughes. The IP vandalism causing the protection is also his handiwork, and WP:HAND is one of the tools in his meager collection. Favonian (talk) 14:35, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
I apologize for the genre changes. I'm well aware of the WP:Policies and guidelines, but I didn't know about the genre changing WP:Sockpuppetry, I was just trying to restore the credits. My understanding (maybe I'm mistaken, if so, tell me) is that, as long as the credits can be sourced from the album jackets, they can be listed in album articles. Unless there's exception(s) to this (and if you could possibly explain, I'd appreciate it) I'm gonna go ahead and restore the sourced credits manually, so as not to conflict with the genre. The source for is the booklet.--2601:153:881:3D60:D934:55AB:54A7:D1E0 (talk) 00:44, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
Brandy's "Never Say Never" page
I posted the accurate sales claim that has yet to be fully disputed. Their is no way the album sold 15 million worldwide, it's at 9 million total globally. Please stop, thank you.Meddymarl (talk) 06:18, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
Margarita Zavala
¿Perdón? ¿No se pueden usar nombres legales si no son comunes? ¿Entonces qué me dices de Bill Gates, Bill Clinton y Joe Biden? Así de fácil se te cae el cuento. De toda la vida el nombre legal va al principio del artículo y el nombre común se pone en el nombre del artículo y en el nombre de la ficha. --BartocX (talk) 18:26, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
@BartocX: ¿Tú comprendes que es la significacion de WP:RS? ¿Quel es la diferencia entre las fuentes primaires y secondaires?--Ymblanter (talk) 18:40, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
@Ymblanter: Sí, ya puse otra fuente más usada. Espero que no tenga que poner otra aun más publicitada. --BartocX (talk) 18:44, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
La referencia que acabo de poner fue publicada en el diario de la federación. ¿Ya es lo suficientemente fiable? --BartocX (talk) 18:46, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
Está bien.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:48, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello.
Regarding this series edits. While clearly made by a certain individual based on past behavior, they are also examples of the less-than-vandalistic nature of many of their edits. I have reverted all of them on the grounds of "not an improvement" (a matter of opinion), but these changes themselves are not really harmful from what I gather (though probably should gain a consensus for sweeping actions like this). Just wondering on second thought, should we allow these relatively innocuous edits to stand? --DB1729 (talk) 13:24, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Nirvana EP Sam Smith
Hi, it is written that Nirvana EP by Sam Smith has 4 tracks, but then in the tracklist you write 5 songs. Lay Me Down is not in the tracklist, as you can see on www.discogs.com
May 2021
Latest comment: 2 years ago18 comments11 people in discussion
A barnstar for you!
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Hi Tbhotch! I wanted to say a thank you for your very significant volume of edits. Particularly, I noticed your tireless work to Mexico City Metro overpass collapse, an important and topical article. Thank you for everything that you do! Bibeyjj (talk) 21:07, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. My goal has always been to inform as many as possible and I honestly didn't think it would be done through the metro stations. (CC)Tbhotch™ 03:01, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Unsourced
Thanks for adding the source for the Line 4 fire. I opted to remove it instead of tagging it. It looks bad if it really was unverifiable and the tag stays on a Main Page article, and it looks bad if someone (you) can quickly find the source (my English search failed). Thanks for all your effort on the page.—Bagumba (talk) 05:53, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
@Bagumba:this one was there for a few hours; they look bad, but a few of them it's not a major problem. Sometimes editors change the content without updating the sources, and as this one is changing quickly, things get overlooked. In this situation, maintenance tags can be helpful to notice those errors. Regards. (CC)Tbhotch™ 06:12, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
On a related note, I am considering moving the page back to Mexico City Metro overpass collapse per WP:RMUM as an undiscussed move. It seems most English sources refer to it as an "overpass" and even the few that use "viaduct" also include "overpass". "viaduct" seems over WP:PRECISE for the title. Any immedidiate objections?—Bagumba (talk) 06:21, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
@Bagumba: I have no objections per se, but as it is linked on the main page, people might not completely like it is being moved over and over again. If I'm understanding overpass and viaduct correctly, they are practically the same thing, but most English sources indeed call it an overpass. (CC)Tbhotch™ 06:32, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the input. I moved it back. Yes, we don't want the churn that was at 2021 Meron stampede; an WP:RM should be opened now if needed.—Bagumba (talk) 08:03, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
protection of all former and current argentinean's presidents articles
or unlock Macri's there is no real reason for the unptrotection of some and protection of others. Please give reasons for the uneven treatment or do as i request FrankRhymez (talk) 03:08, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Madonna Changes
Thank you so much for getting in touch, regarding my recent changes to some Madonna singles.
I would start by saying I have never made any edits or changes here, so, I am new to this, and wasn't sure how to reply to your messages.
The changes I have made are according to www.officialcharts.com. This is the company that complies the charts from 1952.
The charts can also be viewed in the Virgin Book of Hit Singles.
This provides the evidence of the correct release dates of all Madonna singles, taking into account any re-issues and singles not released in North America.
Therefore, Crazy For You, Into The Groove, Holiday (first re-issue), Angel, Gambler, Dress You Up.
Hope that clarifies that, and I would be very grateful for any help or assistance you can provided in how to edit on Wikipedia.
Thank you.
DYK for Oh Sheit It's X
On 8 May 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Oh Sheit It's X, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in "Oh Sheit It's X", Thundercat sings about feeling ecstasy while on ecstasy? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Oh Sheit It's X. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Oh Sheit It's X), 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.
Look man, I understand this music better than Wikipedia itself. None of the songs on the latter half of the History album are entirely hip hop even though some have rapping segments, so it's kind of unfair that the genre was called hip hop without paying attention to an actual genre that influenced it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quit42 (talk • contribs) 19:25, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Big Brother VIP Albania until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
Use of YouTube uploads of Coldplay interviews as sources
I understand that we are not supposed to link to sources that are in violation of anyone's copyright, but the videos that I linked to were on the official YouTube channel of George Stroumboulopoulos, the man who conducted the interviews and hosted The Hour, the show on which the interviews were conducted. You can verify that this really is his channel by going to his official website, which links to the same YouTube channel and even to the same videos. According to WP:COPYLINK and WP:VIDEOLINK, it should be fine to link to these videos because they were uploaded by the creators.
Hi, I see you made this move a couple years ago. I'm currently thinking of moving it to Big Bang (single album), as it is the only single album of that name. Would you agree that this makes sense? Thanks! 162 etc. (talk) 15:21, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi
You sent me a message, what's up? In ictu oculi (talk) 09:21, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
@In ictu oculi: One of the things about the internet is that it doesn't forget. You were aware of the parenthesis at Talk:Chuu (single album) and Talk:Tail (song). You have been citing NCM every time you need it, and you have been complaining about NCM since it was modified in 2016. You complained here, here, here and here (of what I have found). You asked at R. (album) and at NCM "How much discussion was there for this change?" Well, if you pay attention it says: "Use "(single album)" for Asian "single albums".[c]" Where "[c]" includes a link to the relevant discussion that took place during 2019. You don't seem to understand what consensus means, and if you do, you attempt to go against it as much as you are able to because you are not invited personally to discuss such changes. And this is also not the case because you were invited and you did participate at the entertainer RFC and you attempted to go against it a few months ago. As a fact, you have never stopped demonstrating your opinions towards the word entertaiment: "should be Madonna (singer) of course, but anything that removes the sycophantic (entertainer) will be an improvement".
You have tried several times to debunk this calling it a "local consensus" despite that a) it is not a WP:localconsensus, and b) it was an RFC that lasted for 2 months in a widely watchlisted page. What is a local consensus? A local consensus is a discussion that determines that similar-themed articles should follow the same style for consistency. That is, how the Beatles articles are to be titled "(Beatles x)" and not "(The Beatles x)". The discussion affects "local" articles (The Beatles-only) and by no means other bands called "The" have to follow it as WP:THEMUSIC has been discussed to a wider extent. This is the same principle of why you can't use the local consensus for books when discussing films or the Fabergé consensus when discussing jewellery.
But the thing here is that you have been WP:gaming the system for years. You did it with Lingdian (WP:A7), Belinda Lima (WP:A7), or Forbidden Fruit (NSONGS). You did it again a few years ago with Rhinoceros (Rhinoceros album) (NALBUM) and Manzanita (singer) (WP:A7), and you keep doing it with articles like Intime (Christophe album) or The Holy Ground (Mary Black album) (both fail NALBUM). But when you are questioned about it, like that time when you attempted to game it with Tal Vez (NSONGS) or with the original version of Như Quỳnh (WP:A7), they are "honest mistakes" that will not happen again because you have learned from your errors. But as soon as you are stopped being "watched" by others, you continue creating questionable articles. And why I am saying this if it is not related to the RM? Because CSD and NMUSIC were built upon consensus, and despite that, you circumvent their policies and guidelines over and over again. You are always finding new ways to evade established consensuses and if you are caught, "you were not aware of them" and you are sorry for the inconveniences. Remember 18...? I do remember 18... How many times you have edited Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (music)? Did you just ignore that big square every time? What makes you believe that that square doesn't apply to you?
But, let's assume that you are truly unaware of these things, it means that you are not paying attention to what is there or that you are selectively paying attention to what you want to read. Now you can't use it anymore as an excuse because now you are aware of them, the guides and the sanctions. The sole reason you have escaped sanctions every time is that people cared more about articles' quantity and not about their quality, but it's not the case nowadays. See this discussion for example. Do you need sanctions like those? To be forced to use the WP:AFC process for every proposal you make? Because stubs like Dehati (Shadmehr Aghili album) are OK... for new users who don't understand how Wikipedia works, but you have been editing for 11 years, you can't shield with WP:STUB anymore. The sole reason I have not AFD them is that you take it personally, the articles suddenly stop being microstubs with no indication of notability, and you conclude the AFD saying that it was nominated in bad faith despite the fact you created them in awful conditions to create that specific reaction.
And lastly, please stop pretending. We both know this is not about consensus—you just attempted to go against the entertainer consensus; or how the albums above are blatant violations of the consensus reached at WP:NMUSIC–, this is actually about how policies and guidelines limit your opinions, as I already demonstrated it above. You question "Was and is there consensus for this {inclusion}?" Answer: Yes, the link you just mentioned before your question. It's a consensus and NCM is a guideline built with a compilation of RFCs, RMs, and talk page discussions that have created consensuses of what to do with specific situations, including the acceptable use of "single albums". Everything at NCM was discussed accordingly and it reflects what to do in the event it is required to avoid users to go and search in several talk pages the answer for their question. If you have opinions against it, well those are your opinions and they alone don't reflect a consensus.
You are not obliged to know every single policy, guideline, or even administrative sanction, but certainly, you should stop attempting to game and bypass those that you are aware of. (CC)Tbhotch™ 20:46, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
Latest comment: 2 years ago26 comments13 people in discussion
Thanks
Appreciate you removing the spam from my talk page, thanks for that WildAGR (talk) 19:40, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello, I do not know how to talk to you but I think this is the correct way, I would like to inform you that my little brother got on my computer and screwed around on some things, and Wikipedia was one of them, please do not ban me, and could you let me know if there is a possible way for me to be a fact checker or administrator? --Steve1234567891011 (talk) 21:17, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Adding Jeff Porcaro to Drums on Thriller
hey Tbhotch, with regards to Thriller, If you listen to the opening snare hit, that is Jeff Porcaro's snare. We all know he played on the album particularly Human Nature and Beat It, but any music listener, historian knows that sound. I am pretty sure Porcaro played real drums over the drum machine. I can't just call up Quincy Jones or Bob Sweiden (he's dead). Anyways, you just removed the world greatest drummer from one of the worlds greatest songs. My citation is my ear and anyone who KNOWS music KNOWS that was him playing drums at the beginning of Thriller. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.52.105.178 (talk) 02:56, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Unrelated, I just created a stub for Nicho Bears and Bar, which I visited in CDMX. I went to King and Macho Dance Bar as well, but not sure if these quality for entries? ---Another Believer(Talk) 19:13, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
@Another Believer: Where is that fountain located? For the bars, I only found some passing mentions for both that wouldn't satisfy NCorp. Although there's a popular nightclub in that neighborhood called Rico that might be notable enough. (CC)Tbhotch™ 20:33, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
My CDMX gallery has pictures of Fuente de Cibeles and Parque España before and after the fountain, so around there? ---Another Believer(Talk) 20:56, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
I don't believe these sources say Michelangelo, but hopefully someone can improve this over time. ---Another Believer(Talk) 22:10, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Michelangelo's name in Spanish is es:Miguel Ángel ("Réplica del Baco, de Miguel Ángel" [77]) (CC)Tbhotch™ 00:20, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
The removal from T: Beginninhs
Yeah explaining some stuff. I haven't seen it so I can't tell what does it explain. I should have read about it more. Sorry. If I find a write synopsis can I add it there again? Derjenigederzukunftseht (talk) 20:57, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello Tbhotch, the article is already semi-protected. Can you adding pp-vandalism on the article because the article is once again indef semi due to vandalism because admins are not yet adding it to the page. 182.1.6.22 (talk) 19:16, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
"Because multiple banned and blocked users have requested me to perform edits, I will not respond to further requests from unestablished users. Refer to §Evasion and enforcement for further information." (CC)Tbhotch™ 23:45, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
positions (the single)
a user names "Annaoue" the Taiwan chart number positions (the single) did. could you check if it's normal please? AnthonyFG (talk) 04:23, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
top40-charts.com is not a reliable source. For further information refer to WP:BADCHARTS. (CC)Tbhotch™ 04:28, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
Sunshine
Sunshine!
Hello Tbhotch! Interstellarity (talk) has given you a bit of sunshine to brighten your day! Sunshine promotes WikiLove and hopefully it has made your day better. Spread the sunshine by adding {{subst:User:Meaghan/Sunshine}} to someone else's talk page, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. In addition, you can spread the sunshine to anyone who visits your userpage and/or talk page by adding {{User:Meaghan/Sunshine icon}}. Happy editing! Interstellarity (talk) 19:56, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
Happy first day of summer, Tbhotch!! Interstellarity (talk) 19:56, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
Latest comment: 2 years ago12 comments9 people in discussion
Mulan
For Mulan's Reflection song, it seems useful to include either the performing artist or the album cover in the infobox image when there was no singles release. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:37, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
From Template:Infobox song#cover: "Add an image of a sheet music cover, picture sleeve, or other image appropriate for the song." Could you please exemplify another article about a song that is using the performer's picture in the infobox? (CC)Tbhotch™ 17:29, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
That was a good reflection from you on my Talk page. The album cover for the "Live Version" on the Mulan song page at the bottom of that article does feature cover art with the performer featured on it. This is a common approach to 'cover art' generally which often features the original performer. The question here is what to do when there is no singles release, and to ask if it is possible to interpret Wikipedia's policy of "other image appropriate for the song" as including the use of an original performer image when no cover art for the single was ever made. I am answering at length here because this affects several Disney song pages which are peer reviewed like the GA for this Mulan song, and like the "Part of Your World" song for Ariel elsewhere. Is this reasonable? ErnestKrause (talk) 18:42, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 9
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sirry Steffen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Selfoss.
Empresas ICA, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
Hello, Tbhotch. I'm 110.137.124.134. Can you adding pp-sock in the article Palmer Report? Because IMO, aside from semi-protection due to arbitration enforcement, it also due to sockpuppetry from IP users which reinstated same edit to change UK to US spelling. I hope you can add it because admins forget to add it.
Thabk you. 110.137.124.134 (talk) 20:35, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
Not done Requests belong to the page's talkpage. (CC)Tbhotch™ 21:28, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
RD1
I tried addressing the RD one request at Inside Out (2015 film), but I confess I'm not 100% sure I got the right edits. Don't hesitate to let me know if you think I missed something.--S Philbrick(Talk) 00:27, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
R211 paragraph 13
Unexplained that sources was correct not just in NYC. Saturn 5608 (talk) 00:46, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Abuelita hot chocolate.jpg
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:Abuelita hot chocolate.jpg. 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).
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:Flybondi logo.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).
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
_-_354.jpg){kind=link}
