User talk:SNUGGUMS

My talk page. Leave me messages here. Post new threads at the bottom of the page. I can also be contacted through email.

List of songs recorded by Mariah Carey

What do you think?  — Calvin999 19:49, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

• Looking pretty good so far, Calvin999. A couple things from a glance I would adjust though are changing "in a foreign language" to something like "in a non-English language" or perhaps "contains non-English lyrics" since "foreign" is somewhat vague in comparison and working some non-singles into the lead. It's not supposed to just be a replication of Mariah Carey singles discography (I find it ironic to be telling you this since it's is something you once said, though one could say I learned from the best here). One place you could do this well is by elaborating on the "has also covered well known classics and traditional songs for her two Christmas albums" bit with examples of covers included on those records. Snuggums (talk / edits) 00:40, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Good ideas, thank you. I shall apply them. I've closely followed the one for Madonna which I co-worked on, but obviously no two articles are or should be the same.  — Calvin999 14:41, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
    • Sure thing :) Snuggums (talk / edits) 14:57, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
      • I've made some changes.  — Calvin999 15:05, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Hey, see what I've done with AIWFCIY (So So Def Remix), what do you think? Considering there are so many remixes which are re-recorded, I thought ti would be a god idea to highlight them?  — Calvin999 09:45, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Given that it has new vocals outside of a live performance, I can definitely understand including that. I see nothing wrong with the way you've added it. Snuggums (talk / edits) 14:25, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Okay thanks. There so many re-recorded remixes, I haven't even added all of them yet. I found quite a few yesterday I had no idea she'd re-done them.  — Calvin999 14:46, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm still discovering more and more re-sung remixes. You don't think I should create a separate table for the remixes, or even a new remix article list separate the current one do you? Or would the latter be forking?  — Calvin999 18:23, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

O_O Not sure what to say about a separate table, but a separate article would definitely be forking. Snuggums (talk / edits) 21:14, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

FDR

Actually, being Dutch American IS a big deal if you're from New York Island. When the island was settled and "tamed", that act was done by Dutch immigrants who named the island "New Amsterdam". As a result, being from a Dutch American settling family in New York, as the Roosevelt's are, is significant to the island's history, and should be put back into the lead. Additionally, "ethnicity" isn't the deal here, it's ancestry - that was just a minor error on your part and unintentional, I assume? -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 04:25, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

See more here: [1]

Sorry if I got the terminology wrong, but my point was that he isn't really noted for being a Dutch American, at least not nearly as much as major features like his WWII involvements or how he was the only US president to serve more than two terms in office. Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:33, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

You're missing the point. Being a Dutch American is a big deal related to new York and being a member of one of the founding families of New Amsterdam. It's like being from one of the prominent Mayflower or Jamestown families. The content could stand to be reworked to reflect the significance but it really needs to be noted and in the lead. -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 12:20, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Monroe (once again)

Hi, any chance you could mass revert the changes made by Kim Leung to Monroe? She's replaced footnotes, added weasel words, etc. I can do it manually but it will take a longer time to change everything as it was.TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 13:53, 22 January 2018 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3

To be honest, I don't see any weasel wording within her changes, though it did stretch the lead excessively. Snuggums (talk / edits) 17:47, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Loev (film)/archive2

My friend and fellow editor, Numerounovedant, has nominated the article for FAC. Do let him know if you are willing to post comments at the second FAC. Thank you.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 08:55, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello! No promises, but I might later on if I get the chance. Snuggums (talk / edits) 12:53, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

River (Eminem song) cover

Hi SNUGGUMS, do you know if there are any remix, foreign physical release, or alternative single covers from Amazon, that could be uploaded to the "River" infobox please? Theo (contribs) 17:14, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Not as far as I can find, Theo Mandela, sorry. Snuggums (talk / edits) 17:45, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

No worries, thanks for looking. Theo (contribs) 17:49, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Template: Marriage

Hi, you have recently reverted my edit to the infobox of John F. Kennedy citing concerns regarding "overfilling" the infobox regardless that only a tooltip has been created. Given that Template:Marriage is designed for infoboxes, are there any circumstances in which you would regards adding full dates appropriate? Phinn (talk) 18:55, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Read WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE, especially if you haven't already, and the only times I would use full dates within an infobox are when people are born, died, and enter/leave a political office. The only other possible circumstances are when something takes place entirely during the same calendar month. If on the other hand something ends in the same calendar year it began yet a different month, then I'd be fine with using months (i.e. March–June 1945). Snuggums (talk / edits) 19:02, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

I've read WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE and appreciate the need to keep an infobox's contents concise but it does seem a little odd you would not consider to use full dates in a template designed to be used within infoboxes especially since it deliberately generates a tooltip in order to meet the requirements of WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE, e.g. "wherever possible, present information in short form". Would you therefore consider starting a discussion on the relevant talk page, Template talk:Marriage, to remove this function? Phinn (talk) 19:33, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Far more often than not, I've seen only the short form of years used within that template, except for sometimes months when it all lasts throughout a singular calendar year. When the marriage template only displays the year anyway for many readers (especially mobile viewers), using a full date there seems pointless. Snuggums (talk / edits) 19:37, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

As it stands the template is already being used to display a tooltip for 'married'. I'm at a loss why also adding the full date via tooltip for those readers who can see and want it is such a problem. Phinn (talk) 21:11, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

I highly doubt even those who could read it through that tool would want it when just looking for a brief summary. They'd much more likely look within a section noting marriage/relationships in its title. Snuggums (talk / edits) 21:18, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Good Faith Edits

Sorry about not citing some sources. It's all in good faith what I try to do and I would never vandalize pages EVER! That's not my goal here on Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia. My goal is to feed people with as much information as possible. I hope you enjoy the rest of your Wednesday - Bigs

I never stated or even suggested you were vandalizing; you just need to make certain you cite ALL changes made, especially with personal and/or contentious claims involving living people. Snuggums (talk / edits) 20:12, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! I will try to do much better - Bigs

Request for comment

Hey there. I've started a request for comment that you might be interested in – feel free to have your say when you get a chance. Thanks. 4TheWynne^{(talk)(contribs)} 04:47, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Just left my thoughts. Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:54, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

About my recent edit

You sent me a message tha you have reverted my recent edit on Theodore Roosevelt, this edit was to be more easy to read. Finally, I think that my edit was not very essential. Bill Wong (talk) 18:12, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

My concern is that you not only used a misleading edit summary (it didn't correct anything as you suggested), but adding that blank space didn't improve the infobox in any discernible way. Snuggums (talk / edits) 19:33, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Neutral notice

You may or may not wish to join a discussion at Talk:Lyndsy Fonseca#Request for comment about a topic on which you have contributed on an identical RfC. --Tenebrae (talk) 17:26, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Misleading edit

Hello,

You left me a message on my talk page but forgot to mention what edit you were talking about.

WhatsUpWorld (talk) 19:32, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Your recent revision to FDR's page included a misleading edit summary; there were no grammar fixes as you implied there. Don't try to trick people into thinking you did something unrelated to your actual edit. Snuggums (talk / edits) 00:37, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

FYI

Since Ss112 mentioned you multiple times by name, you should probably be aware of the current discussion going on at ANI. It's not about you, so don't need to worry. But I believe the general consensus is that if you're mentioned by name, you should get a notification. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 15:28, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. Patricia CV really needs to stop harassing him and making unsupported/poorly supported changes. Snuggums (talk / edits) 18:08, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Salting an article title

Under some circumstances salting the title of a deleted article can be helpful. However, where there is an editor who has already shown that he or she is willing to change to a different version of the title to avoid detection, there is nothing to be gained by salting the titles which have previously been used, as he or she will just move on to a new one. In fact it can even be better not to salt the title, as there is then at least a chance that the editor may use the same title again, and it's easy to watch for that, whereas if the old titles are all salted then the disruptive editor is forced to move to a new title, and we can't watch for every possible title that he or she might think of. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 21:55, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

I hadn't thought of that before. At least the disruptive sock has now been blocked. Snuggums (talk / edits) 22:48, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Robert Taft Jr.

Are you satisfied that the New York Times might know better than you what the guy says his name is? Sheesh. Roseohioresident (talk) 07:31, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

It's not simply my assertion; The Washington Post says he was Robert Alphonso Taft Jr. Snuggums (talk / edits) 12:18, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Courtesy notice of discussion

Considering you do edit a good amount of albums on the Wikipedia, I thought I'd make you aware of this discussion to edit the current battle of {{Infobox album}}. Hope to see you there! livelikemusic talk! 15:19, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

I've left comments there. Snuggums (talk / edits) 19:05, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Another Daily Mail RfC

There is an RfC at Talk:Daily Mail#Request for comment: Other criticisms section. Your input would be most helpful. --Guy Macon (talk) 12:26, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

It has been given. Snuggums (talk / edits) 17:40, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Michael jackson

Please stop removing actor from Michael Jackson's page. He is a credited actor. Truther1515 (talk) 23:24, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey!

More than 50% of the articles have panned Padukone's performance which can never be counted as evem mixed and Shahid is saying she was praised. Phrases like "failed to make a mark", "terrible portrayal", "failed to do justice", "looses stream", "her performance is wishy-washy", "is merely coasting on her good looks", "the actress fails to bring it out to its full strength", "awful dialogue delivery", and "the actor struggles to make the character as flesh-and-blood as possible" have been used to describe Padukone's portrayal of Mastani. How is this positive? Am I missing something here? Yet Shahid thinks "Padukone's performance is well-received". LOGIC? He is not ready to believe that Padukone's performance was panned despite me giving every claim which is majority of critics panned her performance. He thinks I want to discredit Padukone as I want to glorify Chopra's.Krish | Talk 12:30, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Article content not withstanding, you falsely accused Krimuk of hypocrisy, being two-faced, and making attacks. Not cool. Snuggums (talk / edits) 12:35, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Didn't he just say that he hated me the whole time "he was trying to be nice" to me? If it's not what you call a two-face, what will you. Though I agree I shouldn't have made other comments but he keeps asking other people to join him in hating me. Is that acceptable?Krish | Talk 12:39, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

First of all, saying one has been open about disdain all along isn't two-faced as that would mean one was hiding how he/she felt. People can still be polite to those they don't like as per WP:Civility. Secondly, he doesn't ask others to "join him in hating" you, only to get you to stop your problematic ways. He was right to call you out on your poor conduct. Snuggums (talk / edits) 12:46, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Maybe I should quit Wikipedia. It might make him and others happy.Krish | Talk 12:49, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Hymnodist.2004

Can you please answer the question I asked you on my talk page? I've tried to respect your wish of responding on my own talk page, but you failed to respond to me there twice. Hymnodist.2004 (talk) 12:26, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Must not have noticed, my bad. Snuggums (talk / edits) 14:21, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Melodrama (Lorde album)

Hello,

I saw the edit you made on the Melodrama article, moving the commercial performance details to the release and promotion section. I don't agree with this. I have seen multiple articles where a reception section combines both commercial and critical details. Placing it in the section it is now seems so off. De88 (talk) 04:47, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

It's beyond me how commercial performance suits a "reception" section. Perhaps a "release and reception" section would work, but I fail to see why it would be placed in simply "reception". Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:49, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Well, a reception section includes how critics and audiences reacted to the album (i.e. Critic's reviews, audience consumption). It makes sense to include both together. Just for reference, this good article does this as well. De88 (talk) 05:02, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

To be honest, you'd be better off just having "commercial performance" now that I think about it instead of merging with "reception" because reviews aren't exactly connected to sales or charts. Snuggums (talk / edits) 05:06, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

That's the thing, I intentionally combined both so that the commercial section would not look so empty from the rest of the article. Combining said section with the reviews made the article feel more balanced. Also, from what I've been told and all the articles I have worked on that have been reviewed, almost all of them have sales and reviews combined under reception, not critical reception. De88 (talk) 05:10, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

If you added detail on more nations, then that probably wouldn't look so bare. Only 5 (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, United Kingdom, and United States) out of 20+ looks incomplete. Snuggums (talk / edits) 05:14, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

I spent months researching this. Sales data for this album is very slim. It's not that easy just saying, "If you added detail on more nations, then that probably wouldn't look so bare," especially for an album that was obviously not as commercially successful as its predecessor. De88 (talk) 05:22, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Not even certifications would help? I know those aren't definitive sales indicators, but they do help flesh out commercial performance sections. You could perhaps note some range comparisons to Pure Heroine (i.e. "second top 5 album") regardless of sales/streaming figures. Snuggums (talk / edits) 05:26, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Even with certifications, first-week sales and comparisons to its predecessor, it just would not be enough to truly expand the section. I can already see only two small paragraphs noting the album's sales. It would just not work, in all honesty. Just for reference, this is how the commercial performance section for Pure Heroine looks like. De88 (talk) 05:31, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Quite detailed! I'm guessing you also haven't come across much (if any) information on year-end performance for Melodrama on the other hand (i.e. overall consumption of sales and streams) or weeks spent at chart peaks. Snuggums (talk / edits) 05:36, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Unfortunately, no. Billboard only releases year-end data sales from the top 10 albums of the year and well, Melodrama was not even in the top 100 last year. That was one of the reasons that kept me from finishing this article. De88 (talk) 05:41, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Uncivil posting

Yes, I suppose the F-word was uncivil.

Let me be incredibly frank:

I used to contribute generously and boldly to Wikipedia. I have long since ceased.

Reason #1: Create something excellent and spellbinding, and jackass #2 comes along behind you and destroys it and posts his own self-serving garbage, typically fraught with technical errors, never mind the kindergarten-level English.

Reason #2: Almost everywhere I travel throughout the length and breadth of Wikipedia, I encounter self-serving arrogance and worthless "content." Even in a mathematics article, for instance, authors tend to focus on what my beloved Prof. Bailyn called "alphabet soup" to make things seem more sophisticated, usually because they either (1) lack enough understanding of the material to be able to explain concepts to those who seek out Wikipedia in the first place in order to learn the concepts from those who ostensibly (1a) possess the requisite knowledge and (1b) are passionate about sharing it in digestible form with commoner #3--or (2) ostensibly possessing such understanding, lack the ability to render those concepts in worthwhile, pedagogic, didactic English.

BTW, I edited this repeatedly because I didn't want to be accused of YELLING when I could merely have unyelled, so to speak . . . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:589:4B00:7AB:C54F:52FD:905B:F193 (talk) 16:35, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Sorry if you've been frustrated with others making problematic changes, but it's not an excuse to call people "fuckasses" or any other insults per WP:Civility and WP:No personal attacks. Snuggums (talk / edits) 16:48, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Kartu and Gekaap

I strongly believe these are socks and Snuggs we gotta keep an eye since I believe Gekaap won't give up reverting on Katy Perry. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 11:35, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

So do I, and it's surprising that Bbb23 didn't think the SPI you filed presented enough evidence for a connection. A block for both should come at some point. Snuggums (talk / edits) 11:53, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

GAR reassessment

Thanks for closing the Big four reassessment. Would you be interested in closing a few more. I am happy to work through most of them, but could really do with the help. There are a few I am involved in and shouldn't close (one as a reviewer and another as a commentator). AIRcorn (talk) 21:49, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

My pleasure. If I find anything else that can safely be closed, then I'll do so accordingly. Snuggums (talk / edits) 21:57, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks

Many thanks Snuggums for guiding Vulva to GA. all best - --Iztwoz (talk) 06:08, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

My pleasure; it was well worthwhile. Snuggums (talk / edits) 11:55, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Madonna

Since you have reverted me, with the reason that it has been cited in the article, can you please, as a courtesy, point to the source that refers to Madonna as businesswoman, when introducing who she is. LK (talk) 11:42, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Looking within "Impact and influence", she is specifically referred to as such by Routledge International Encyclopedia of Women: Global Women's Issues and Knowledge as well as the Spanish-language publication ¿Qué es Estados Unidos?. Snuggums (talk / edits) 14:09, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

WT:DYK#Template:Did you know nominations/Sarah Frey

Please see my response there. Yoninah (talk) 17:43, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Noted and replied! Snuggums (talk / edits) 21:06, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Theory of a Deadman discography

Hey, I see you noticed I'd been editing the list and thought I'd ask if you could comment at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Theory of a Deadman discography/archive1. A user named Ojorojo, who made Jimi Hendrix discography a featured list and appears to think discographies look better with no more than two columns or inconsistent countries listed in each section, is reviewing it, asking if it's an "ownership issue" that I partially reverted the nominator, Miss Sarita, earlier when they removed chart columns with only one entry in them...like, no, it's just not the way most discographies are? The comments are just odd. So if you can add your two cents to the review (maybe regarding this issue, because I don't see any other quality discographies on WP that use two columns and then a column labelled "Other" where all other countries' chart positions are listed as foonotes), it'd be much appreciated. Thanks! Ss112 02:37, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Done and done! Snuggums (talk / edits) 02:47, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Talk:Ariana Grande discography

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Fan4Life (talk) 14:29, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Left a comment there. Snuggums (talk / edits) 19:12, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Help

Hello. Help expanded article by Maureen Wroblewitz from [2]. Thanks you.Kim Mai 13 (talk) 03:04, 19 April 2018 (UTC)