Chubbles

Question on recent rollback

Hey Chubbles, I saw that you recently reverted A Lighter Shade of Brown and I don't fully understand why you rolled back my reference update. You said that "the AMG ref did not verify the information inserted". I don't know what 'AMG' means in that context, and I did verify that the source says that DTTX died in a coma after 11 days on July 18th. Did my edit just get caught in the crossfire of reverting the prior IP-user edits? I'd appreciate clarification before I try and update/fix the bare url source on the page. Thanks, CheesedToMeetYou (talk) 21:40, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

You are correct that I appear to have reverted two different editors, which I did not realize at the time. My main concern was with the bad IP edits. I'm not sure the TMZ article meets WP:RS, but I've no qualm with the format updating. Chubbles (talk) 02:53, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Lovitt Records

Hi Chubbles. Myself and Brian run a label called Lovitt. We actively release music from artists from all over the world. You have taken down our Wikipedia entry which we have never maintained — as we understand it would be advertising if we had — but always appreciated having. What is disappointing is that we have a long legitimate history of over 25 years. Lots of press and coverage over time much of it was on the site. We also have released new notable records in the last 5 years including Icelandic artist of the year Sóley and her new record, Mother Melancholia. So, in all humility the discussion around the removal of the page felt like it was built with little awareness of a. the Independent music community or b. DIY culture — what recourse do we have and what steps should we take to have the decision reviewed? It also seems as if some of the users were “sock puppets” and have since been band from Wikipedia. Thank you for your time and let me know if you have any feedback.

david@lovitt.com 122.58.106.54 (talk) 21:01, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Sir, you have the case all wrong. I fought for the article to be kept in a community deletion process; another editor nominated it for deletion, and the community consensus, over my protestations, was that Lovitt Records was insufficiently notable enough for an article. I know how important Lovitt is; you don't have to sell me on that. But at this point, the only way Lovitt will ever have an article again is for multiple substantial, independent pieces of journalism about Lovitt to surface. That means profiles of the label (not its artists) in a major music magazine, newspaper, music history book, or music encyclopedia. Since it has already been deleted by the sturdiest process for deletion Wikipedia has, the community bias will be against reinstating the article without a convincingly large amount of independent, third-party media coverage. If you can find me such coverage, I am willing to work on reinstating the article. I would encourage you to send it to me rather than adding it yourself; Wikipedia very much looks down on people writing their own articles, and since yours was already deleted, it's overwhelmingly likely it will be deleted again if someone with a vested interest tries. Chubbles (talk) 23:17, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Lovitt

Hi again. We couldn’t figure out how to reply to your thoughtful response to my original questions. I understand — kind of — what you are saying. I also appreciate the advocacy. At the end of the day how we measure the relevance of culture being mapped back to mainstream media or coverage can be counter intuitive. So, it seems unlikely that a New York Times piece is pending, and maybe if Wikipedia doesn’t have criteria otherwise that it might be a lost cause in any case. We will keep releasing artists we care about and hope that it’s enough. I am not pointing any fingers at you, just that you were kind enough to reply. Thank you.

Good luck and take care. 122.58.94.217 (talk) 01:01, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Lynn, Utah for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lynn, Utah is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lynn, Utah 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.

Mangoe (talk) 00:41, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Talk:All Lights Fucked on the Hairy Amp Drooling#RfC regarding the album description "claimed to be" has an RFC

Talk:All Lights Fucked on the Hairy Amp Drooling#RfC regarding the album description "claimed to be" has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. 66.30.12.132 (talk) 18:39, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Flux, Utah for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Flux, Utah is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flux, Utah 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.

Mangoe (talk) 02:26, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Aragonite, Utah for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Aragonite, Utah is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aragonite, Utah 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.

Mangoe (talk) 04:45, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

About Five Deez

Hi there! Would you mind letting me know what part of WP:MUSICBIO that Five Deez fufills? Thank you! — Mcguy15 (talk, contribs) 23:08, 30 March 2022 (UTC) (please use {{reply to|Mcguy15}} on reply; thanks!)

@Mcguy15: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] Chubbles (talk) 23:19, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! I was under the impression that notability is not inherited (all of the sources are about the artist's work, but not the artist), but I'm not sure if it applies to artists so I'll just leave it. — Mcguy15 (talk, contribs) 02:36, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

@Mcguy15: Coverage of an artist's work is coverage of that artist. There's no encyclopedic logic to having articles about albums or songs that pass WP:GNG without having an article about the corresponding artist; we would be the only encyclopedia functioning in that way if we did. Chubbles (talk) 10:26, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

Blue Sky Riders

Nice rescue job on Blue Sky Riders. Thanks. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 17:32, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Rosemary Sharp

Exactly where does it say that you can't renominate something if the last AFD closed as "no consensus"? It was two years ago. I'm looking for consensus. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 15:45, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of The Girlfriends

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on The Girlfriends requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Btspurplegalaxy 🗩 🖉 09:15, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of The Girlfriends for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Girlfriends is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Girlfriends 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.

Shirt58 (talk) 09:56, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

WikiProject assessment tags for talk pages

Thank you for your recent articles, including The Structure of Crystals, which I read with interest. When you create a new article, can you add the WikiProject assessment templates to the talk of that article? See the talk page of the article I mentioned for an example of what I mean. Usually it is very simple, you just add something like {{WikiProject Keyword}} to the article's talk, with keyword replaced by the associated WikiProject (ex. if it's a biography article, you would use WikiProject Biography; if it's a United States article, you would use WikiProject United States, and so on). You can also use a friendly script for that. You do not have to rate the article if you do not want to, others will do it eventually. Those templates are very useful, as they bring the articles to a WikiProject attention, and allow them to start tracking the articles through Wikipedia:Article alerts and other tools. For example, WikiProject Poland relies on such templates to generate listings such as Article Alerts, Popular Pages, Quality and Importance Matrix and the Cleanup Listing. Thanks to them, WikiProject members are more easily able to defend your work from deletion, or simply help try to improve it further. Feel free to ask me any questions if you'd like more information about using those talk page templates. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 15:38, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Victor Sanz

Per WP:BOLD, I moved Victor Sanz back into article space. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 05:30, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Did somebody G4 this page after the first AfD? You had improved it afterwards, and that shouldn't have happened. Regardless, he certainly meets WP:MUSIC now. Thanks. Chubbles (talk) 05:47, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Francis Goya for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Francis Goya is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Francis Goya 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 until the discussion has finished.

Sideswipe9th (talk) 01:52, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Buffoons

Increase in the buffoon population. Veddernarian (talk) 23:44, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Bill Blue

Hello Chubbles,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Bill Blue for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Jamiebuba (talk) 14:51, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Stop following me around

Please stop following me around to revert everything that does not fit into your opinion. Admins tend to frown upon that. The Banner talk 16:40, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Origin in lead sentence

Hi Chubbles, I removed the orgin of an artist from the lead sentence as is the case with most if not all well written bios. If the person's origins has something to do with notability then it can be included. This goes for ethnicity as well. I have seen alot of rappers need this addressed, but please look at well written bios of rappers and see this is the case. Thank you, Malerooster (talk) 18:33, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

I'm intimately familiar with WP:ETHNICITY, and would agree with you if this were an issue relating to ethnicity or race, but that's a different matter than place/region. Because of the size of the country and the regional diversity of American musical cultures, it's quite common on musical artist pages for the first sentence of the lede to be structured, "Joe Sixpack is an American musician from City, State", or "The Sixpack Band is an American musical group from City, State". In any case, when sourced, it's certainly not something we would want removed, as it is clearly encyclopedic. Chubbles (talk) 02:51, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Rowley, Utah for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rowley, Utah is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rowley, Utah 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 until the discussion has finished.

–dlthewave ☎ 04:03, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Demon Queen

Hello, Chubbles

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Demon Queen for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons. For more details please see the notice on the article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Atsme 💬 📧 16:28, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for notifying me of this discussion; I will be participating in it. Chubbles (talk) 22:39, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Bob Degen for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bob Degen is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bob Degen 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 until the discussion has finished.

QuietHere (talk) 16:29, 7 November 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) 00:35, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Pinkshinyultrablast

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Pinkshinyultrablast requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. evs 💬 20:34, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi, just nominated The Drift (band) for deletion

Hey, I was struggling to find any sources to updates The Drift (band) so I did a lil PROD. I'm still rather new to the deletion process, so please let me know if I'm missing something. Thanks for all your work on the 'pedia and please let me know if I'm messing anything up! Crunchydillpickle (talk) 17:38, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

I encourage you to be quite sure that something merits deletion before tagging it for deletion. There are alternatives to deletion. Thank you. Chubbles (talk) 04:46, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Angst (band)

The article Angst (band) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Old article that fails Google test.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. I dream of horses ^{(Contribs) (Talk)} 22:25, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

The Delta Rhythm Boys

(the delta rhythm boys)

you removed ( Floyd Marmon ) who grew up with these boys and wrote the song. He was left behind after he died the end of 1933.

it kinda pissed me off you did that because you know nothing about my uncle who wrote (Gimme Some Skin) you are just like the rest who disregarded him. He wrote that song and never got any credit because he died young before the group went off.

floyd h Marmon is the father of Florez Kathy Sledge who is the mother of sister sledge.

Floyd Henry Marmon never got any credit for his song he wrote before he died August 2 1933 2600:6C42:6A3F:65F7:BD0D:9106:EB26:DCB2 (talk) 19:55, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

We can happily accept adjustments to the article if they are supported by reliable sources. If this story hasn't been told by a book or magazine or other journalistic outlet, that may be the first place you want to take your family knowledge. Chubbles (talk) 04:31, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Talk:The Storm Before the Calm#Euro label

@Chubbles: Share your thoughts regarding the album if you wish to. 2001:D08:2901:372C:176E:668A:26DB:24BF (talk) 18:10, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Black Lab

Black Lab has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 23:59, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Excelsior Recordings

Can you solve the three links to disambiguation pages in Excelsior Recordings? The Banner talk 12:33, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Simon Says (band) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Simon Says (band), to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simon Says (band) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Super Madrigal Brothers

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Super Madrigal Brothers requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 00:33, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:29, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Invitation

Hello Chubbles, we need experienced volunteers.

• New Page Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles. We could use a few extra hands on deck if you think you can help.
• Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; Wikipedia needs experienced users to perform this task and there are precious few with the appropriate skills. Even a couple reviews a day can make a huge difference.
• Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision (if it looks daunting, don't worry, it basically boils down to checking CSD, notability, and title). If this looks like something that you can do, please consider joining us.
• If you would like to join the project and help out, please see the granting conditions. You can apply for the user-right HERE.
• If you have questions, please feel free to drop a message at the reviewer's discussion board.
• Cheers, and hope to see you around.

Sent by NPP Coordination using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:27, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Steve Ellington

The article Steve Ellington has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

non notable person

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jax 0677 (talk) 00:49, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Undid revision 1191582823

Hello Chubbles, maybe you're right to undo my revision, following the regulations. Aside from these, there is always a small space where personal opinion comes into play, and I question your standards: Yes, they are "contentious claims" - that's why they're filed under "criticism", and not "history". And what exactly is so "poorly sourced" when 4 bands independently express the same bad experience with this label? And about 50 more bands take part in a public discussion - and also express the same bad experiences here? Many bands have been ripped off by this label, and these unknown bands have no lobby, their only means are their social media channels - an entry on Wikipedia would have helped to prevent other bands from having the same bad experience... Giving no voice to the bands betrayed does nothing but help to ensure nothing changes in these fraudulent business practices. 2003:D5:FF4C:2500:7C66:F2A4:222E:2F3C (talk) 10:26, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Criticism of the sort you added to the article needs to come from an independent reliable source - that is, it needs to be from a third-party publication (not directly involved in the matter, as all of these bands are) that has editorial oversight of its articles. Otherwise, Wikipedia is opening itself up to possible legal action by taking a side based on hearsay, in a way that could negatively impact someone's business. Chubbles (talk) 13:02, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Steve Ellington for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Steve Ellington is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Ellington 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 until the discussion has finished.

Jax 0677 (talk) 13:47, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Prophet entertainment

Hello Since you removed my proposal to delete Prophet Entertainment, can you merge it with Three 6 Mafia or Hypnotize Minds. JuanBoss105 (talk) 22:37, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

NARAS National Assoc Recording arts & sciences requirements

All memberships of the NARAS Grammys are required to prove to a panel of piers in official capacity whether their recorded products meet certain standards plus at this time 12 releases required to even apply. To be a VOTING member of the Grammy awards is also an honor to judge recorded releases by artists in a two tiered process. Unlike other popularity public votes for non tv broadcast national awards, the Grammy voting members are given a document noting the years of their service. The editors of Wikipedia are often unable to know the hard work of achievements to reach the highest USA music recording industry Grammy, Oscar or Emmys given to the best in the entertainment business. The editors like Gabby who decide some of the artists on Wikipedia.org pages must have their Grammy voting category or other proven accomplishments removed must reassess their deeds asap. This decision for Wikipedia.org reputations declines when facts are posted then edited out maliciously before the business is harmed as they harm their own reputations, don’t you think? 2600:8801:8606:350:8BF:8902:CC92:BDAB (talk) 19:31, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Scott Colley

The article Scott Colley has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unref blp; doesn't appear to meet WP:BIO / WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Boleyn (talk) 19:24, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

"Everybody clap your hands" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Everybody clap your hands has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 9 § Everybody clap your hands until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 23:47, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Jagjaguwar

I know you want articles about record labels as spammy and unverified as possible, but a slow edit war is still a slow editwar. Why do you not try to add independent sources (i.e. not the personal website of the artists or the company website) to the article. The Banner talk 09:22, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Warning

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. AutisticAndrew (talk) 10:19, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Question about Ralph Peterson, Jr. rollback

I see that you reverted an edit I made to Ralph Peterson Jr. for PEACOCK/"puffery." The information about Peterson's father was taken from his New York Times obituary, and his relationship with this locally notable individual may indeed shed light on his "early life." I am new to Wikipedia editing, and am happy to learn more about what is or is not appropriate to include. If I made a formatting error, I would eager to correct it. Thanks! Game was rigged from the start (talk)

I see now that I've made a mistake, here. My main concern was with the text, "Probably the most prominent drummer of his generation to consistently front his own groups, he was also an insightful educator and mentor." This text, which if in the body of the article would violate WP:PEACOCK, I now see is actually the subheadline of the New York Times article. I'll correct the error. Chubbles (talk) 01:06, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks--I'm trying to get the hang of this. Is it better not to include the subheads?

I am working on adding more information to this page based on interviews that Peterson has done in the jazz press, as well as information from sources like Downbeat magazine and other outlets listed as reliable sources. Anything you suggest taking a look at? I appreciate the help. Game was rigged from the start (talk) 01:14, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

I guess in most cases the headline is sufficient, unless it's so short that the subhead better helps identify the article. I just misread it in context. As for sourcing, I got a ton of use out of the New Grove Dictionary of Jazz. It's expensive on paper (maybe a local library has it), and you have to pay for a subscription (unless you have an association with a good university!), but it's a wonderful trove of topical information. Chubbles (talk) 01:28, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. This is a dry run for what might be a bigger project, so I appreciate the help. Game was rigged from the start (talk) 02:12, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	So many articles I notice have been started by you. Thank you. Mach61 19:59, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Brief Biography - i'm sowwy :C

Charles Leander Evander Worthington-Chubbles Jr. (also known as "Charles Chubbles", or "Chubbs") was born on April 5, 1986, in a warehouse south of Chernobyl, 3 weeks before the event occurred. He is known for his hand in both the creation of Epstein's Island and the 9/11 attacks. He is an active supporter of the Kiersten Jones Wikipedia 34 Movement (which can be found by searching "Wikipedia" on Rule 34). 2600:1700:2D23:C8B0:3C4B:C248:4AD6:E353 (talk) 21:31, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Santi Debriano

Can you explain to me why you canceled my edits? Every sentence had a reference.--Марко Станојевић (talk) 15:14, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

There were substantial problems with the writeup and footnoting. Many of the footnotes you added are not references per WP:RS; for instance, smallslive.com is a website for a concert venue, and is not an independent editorial source like a newspaper or magazine. You also included links to Amazon.com, which is a commercial website, and Bandcamp, which is a digital streaming/sale website (while Bandcamp does have some independent journalism, you linked to a commercial artist page). Jazzleadsheets, too, is a commercial music sale site. Furthermore, you've included promotional language (such as what books are for sale on Amazon.com) and a lot of language that violates Wikipedia's guidelines WP:PROMO and WP:PEACOCK (such as, "He has great knowledge in the field of jazz and respects different cultures and traditions" - this is unverifiable information that puffs up the subject of the article rather than explains neutrally what he did in his career). Improvements to the article will need to fix all these problems; the previous version of the article did not have nearly so many issues and that's why I reverted. Chubbles (talk) 15:26, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

OK. I will correct everything you said to make the article good. I didn't know that those sites were not allowed to be used. Thanks for the explanation.--Марко Станојевић (talk) 15:31, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

I took a big stab at fixing up some of the issues, retaining some of the good references you added. Chubbles (talk) 15:34, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Can the site "onestopjazzcollective.com" be used in the article?--Марко Станојевић (talk) 15:40, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

According to its website [9], it is a commercial promoter, so I would not recommend it. There is lots of good independent jazz journalism that covers Debriano; the Allmusic and Allaboutjazz pages are good starts, and he probably has an entry in The New Grove Dictionary of Jazz, if you can access that. Chubbles (talk) 15:44, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Can I complete the discography? There is no single album (as sideman) from the 21st century.--Марко Станојевић (talk) 17:21, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, but please keep the formatting intact. Chubbles (talk) 20:44, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Seven years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:36, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of Boyracer for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Boyracer is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boyracer 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 until the discussion has finished.

Warren L.T. Peace (talk) 19:31, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

"Lazy editing"

No, it's lazy editing to introduce content without a source in the first place. Not saying that's what you are doing. The Somos page isn't the worst I've seen, but I've seen gigantic walls of plagiarized text all over band biographies. Alot of this stuff is going to need to be rewritten anyway. CatTits10 (talk) 00:25, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

You're talking to editors who left the project many years ago, before the sourcing requirements were as rigid as you see them now in 2024. Dynamiting the pages is a bad way to solve the problem, as it frequently makes the pages all but unusable. (We used to ban editors for quick-edit mass removals of the sort you're doing, but times have changed.) Adding sources is a better one. By all means, please rewrite articles with better sourcing as you see fit. Chubbles (talk) 00:28, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't have time to add sources to every single band. If the page is "unusable" without its unsourced info then that really says something about the integrity of Wikipedia then doesn't it? CatTits10 (talk) 00:30, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

If you don't have time to edit Wikipedia well, you should not be editing Wikipedia. Flat out. Take the time, please. I'm not (at all) interested in having an extended discussion about this, so please let this conversation end quickly. Chubbles (talk) 00:32, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm doing what should have been done years, DECADES AGO. These articles are super unmaintained. It's so embarrassing that there is so much unsourced content on this site dude!! CatTits10 (talk) 00:35, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Dude! Enjoy making friends here! Chubbles (talk) 00:39, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm not here to make friends dude, lol. I'm here to maintain the integrity of an online encyclopedia. CatTits10 (talk) 00:42, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Use of notable

I don't have a preference between notable, noted, or noteworthy when it comes to naming an embedded members' list in an honor society article. However, this is not an issue limited to one article or WP Fraternities and Sororities; WP F&S is a very small sliver of usage across Wikipedia. For example, the suggested organization of articles about cities includes a section for "Notable people". (see GA Cary, North Carolina, for an example). University, college, and high school articles have sections for "Notable alumni" or "Notable people" with subsections for "Notable faculty". (However, "notable" gets dropped when the embedded list is moved to a list article, such as List of Duke University people). Since WP F&S tends to follow terminology of WP:UNI and its some 200,000 articles, we are probably unlikely to make the change you suggest unless it is a broader Wikipedia conversation. (I will not attempt to guess the number of place/city/county/province articles that use "notable people"). In terms of crossing with Wikipedia terminology, I would guess this was intentional back in the day, as such lists are typically limited to individuals who meet Wikipedia's guidelines for notability, either by already having an article or having enough sources for an article. The city article editors are pretty rigid that a Wikipedia article is needed to be included in a Notable people list. Thus, all Notable people are "notable" by Wikipedia standards, not some general use of the word. Rublamb (talk) 04:06, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

You understand the reasons behind the usage perfectly well, and you are correct that it is pervasive on Wikipedia. However, it is nevertheless contrary to ASR, which was made precisely because Wikipedia-internal usage was, and still is, very common on article pages. These are not good reasons to let the usage proliferate further. I can't say I see a good reason why WP:IAR would apply to this article, either. If this usage is on a very large number of pages that are overseen by your group, I imagine there is bot help available to mass-change. Chubbles (talk) 04:19, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

I am a fan of Boldy Go. However, I am not convinced this is an ASR case (if I understand this concept). Just because the word "notable" has a specific meaning to Wikipedia editors does not change the word's meaning in standard English or make it Wikipedia jargon that is taboo for article content. In the example of a university's alumni, we are not listing all alumni, just the important ones. Thus, the use of the term "notable" has the specific purpose of better defining the contents of the list for readers. And, "notable" is probably more common in American English than "noted"; we probably use "famous" or "important" more often which is worth considering.

That being said, if you get WP:UNI to agree, I will make the proposed changes to WP:F&S articles. I am an active member of both groups but have no sway with the OG editors of WP:UNI. WP F&S is easy--I am a part of the active core already working on standards. Rublamb (talk) 05:07, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I mean, I can see even in this conversation how there's slippage between "notable" referring to "noteworthy or important" and "meeting the Wikipedia guidelines for notability", and the casual reader is expected to be unfamiliar with the latter. I think I will ask at ASR for more clarification on general strategies for handling the usage. Chubbles (talk) 05:44, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

That would be helpful. Other than not repeating a list article's title in its lede, I don't know much about the guidelines ASR sets. Rublamb (talk) 19:16, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Question

Hi. What's CSC? (asking re this restoration of uncited blp info). https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gooom_Disques&diff=1248463286&oldid=1248402624

Thanks. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:B5B4:44F9:9229:B399 (talk) 17:50, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, I was referencing WP:CSC, specifically bullet 3. Since these are bounded lists of members of a group, and since the artist roster of a label is encyclopedic, it's not illegitimate to include a full list, and there's not really a V or BLP issue here (it's easily verifiable from the publication data of a released disc, and WP:SKYISBLUE). Chubbles (talk) 02:19, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. How do you read that squaring with wp:burden? I was not under the impression that "easily verifiable" places the burden on anyone other than the restorer .. especially w/a blp (though wp:burden does not limit itself to blps). --2603:7000:2101:AA00:B5B4:44F9:9229:B399 (talk) 02:35, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

You selectively removed only the non-bluelinked articles, which suggests that the real concern here was not WP:V, but WP:N. There isn't a good-faith V concern here; these weren't removed over a genuine belief that these artists might not be signed to the label, and that's because it's trivially easy to verify this with publication data (albums are published works, like books). But the list is not bounded by N, on account of CSC and also WP:NNC. Chubbles (talk)

I'm concerned with both V and N. If it is easy to verify, the burden is on the person restoring the non-referenced, redlinked name. My concern about N and V are greater when there is not a single ref, and there is not a WP article. AGF might be another reason to apply wp:burden. Which does not say "feel free to restore uncited blp names where there is neither a wp article nor a reference (if you think it easy to verify." But rather: "The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution.... Any material lacking an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the material may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source".2603:7000:2101:AA00:3411:4E05:56FE:5EBD (talk) 22:07, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm not convinced either of these are of much concern. First, "Is this band signed to this label, or did someone add it in error or as a hoax" is a completely different question from "Is this band notable enough to be in this list?", and the former requires specific scrutiny on a particular band's position, whereas the latter, if it were justified, is more in line with mass removal. They are fundamentally different concerns, and the editing style suggests that you are really only asking one of the questions. But more important than that is, why is this anywhere close to a verifiability issue? You're making all this hay out of BURDEN, but I can't imagine there is any real benefit to users or to the accuracy of the information provided on this project by studding these articles with dozens or hundreds of footnotes containing citations to the label's published records. That's a colossal waste of our volunteers' time; it's why we ask people to verify things that are likely to be challenged, rather than willy-nilly overciting everything under the sun or sandblasting anything without a footnote off of a page. I think the better way to solve that alleged problem would be to add comprehensive discographies to the pages, because then the publication data for the bands is right there on the page, and it has the added benefit of providing an organized set of information that's also encyclopedically relevant. Ultimately, if you want to spend more time on this question, you may want to open a discussion at WP:RECORD LABEL. Chubbles (talk) 02:53, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

• I said above that I am concerned about both V and N. I cited to wp:burden, which is clear. By removing it, in case this is unclear, I am challenging it. The burden is not on me to look for and search for N and V. It is on the person restoring the text. You suggest it is simple to do. In that case, anyone restoring it can do so, rather than edit against wp:burden. You also continue to not AGF, and prefer to intuit bad faith, which I find surprising. And if you want to revise wp:burden because you dislike it, or revise AGF, I respect that, but the place to do so may perhaps not be here .. I wonder whether it may not be the better course to AGF, respect wp:burden, and not restore uncited names without proper refs as was done here. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:3411:4E05:56FE:5EBD (talk) 04:34, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

  So, the two issues here are completely separate, as I've noted, and the N issue is moot, per the guidelines I have cited. So that leaves the V issue, which is the meat of your counterclaim here. But you are asking for V for publication data. The V question you are asking is "Is/was this band really signed to this label?", and the verification of this question fundamentally is answered by the existence of a published work - an album in a discography. But it's simply ridiculous to "cite" albums in inline footnotes in the following fashion:

• Foo artist

We add citations and remove content per WP:V when there is some question of veracity at heart, but what you're requesting is like asking for a citation for a citation. We don't need another source to prove that HarperCollins published Predictably Irrational; this is proven by the existence of the book itself, by its title page. So, too, with published albums. (Otherwise, you'd need citations for your citations - a standard that even a law journal would consider excessive.) When someone indiscriminately removes content for no discernible good reason - simply stating, "I am removing it, because policy says I can, and you can't put it back", yes, it becomes hard to maintain AGF, because the argument smacks of WP:LAWYER. I don't know why you're doing what you're doing - why we would see any good-faith V issue with the named artists on these labels, and the answer I'm getting is simply parroting policy rather than arguing on merits. Chubbles (talk) 05:06, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Santi Debriano

Are you sure his name is "Santi Wilson Debriano"? I found on google that his name is "Asante Santi Debriano". I looked and on his Facebook page is "Asante Santi Debriano". I can't find the official site. It doesn't seem to have an official website.--Марко Станојевић (talk) 09:36, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Well, he has several credits under the name "Santi Wilson Debriano" and none under "Asante Santi Debriano" - see [10]. He may have changed his name, but the infobox field is for birth name, and in any case we'd want a good source to document a name change. I'd like to know what Grove says - sadly I don't have online access to it at the moment. Chubbles (talk) 04:07, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:27, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Technologie (Black Lab album) cover art.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Technologie (Black Lab album) cover art.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).

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) 18:19, 29 October 2024 (UTC)