User talk:ILIL

Vaporwave

		The Music Barnstar
		you probably already have one of these but thank you for all the fantastic edits to Vaporwave! Keep it up👌☭🎆🌎🎼🎺🐦 03:39, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Beach Boys Unreleased Section

Hey how can I go about sourcing things properly? You removed my edit on TheBeach Boys unreleased song 'I'm A Man' but the info you have on there currently is incorrect. I am a long time massive BeachBoys fan and I and many people are that it was written by Brian Wilson and the interview I provided was real. Also with the Boys And Girls song. Why did you removed what I added there? Please tell me how to source this info properly, this area needs to be more factual

You wrote "Brian once said in an interview with Pulse Magazine in 1988 ... " followed by a link to a message board, which contains no interview with Pulse. In what issue and on what page does Brian talk about the song? These kinds of details are needed. See WP:RS for more info.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 22:49, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Pink Floyd

Hello. Could you create a page for "John Latham" by Pink Floyd, please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.7.67.184 (talk) 02:52, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, when you stop reverting edits.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 10:56, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

I thank you for proposing the new name at what is now the Garage punk (fusion genre) article. That turned out to be a great solution to a lot of the issues we were discussing there and at Acid rock. I also appreciate a lot of your work at the Garage rock article--you had some great ideas there too. It looks like the Garage rock article is now approaching a place that everyone can embrace. So, it seems like the whole process, no matter how difficult at times, will turn out for the best. Garagepunk66 (talk) 01:07, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

United Western Recorders

• The United Western complex produced some of the biggest hit records of the pop era. According to the book Temples of Sound, "No other studio has won more technical excellence awards, and no studio has garnered as many Best Engineered Grammys as this complex of studios on Sunset Boulevard."
• Cogan, Jim (2003). Temples of Sound. San Francisco: Chronicle Books LLC. pp. 30–41. ISBN 0-8118-3394-1.
• Its Studio 3 room is considered "iconic" for its use by Brian Wilson for the Beach Boys' albums Pet Sounds (1966) and Smile (unreleased).
• Fact (July 15, 2015). "Animal Collective finish recording new album in iconic Pet Sounds studio". Factmag.

Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk) 14:10, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

@Xb2u7Zjzc32: Are you a bot or just confused? The Beach Boys used Western between 1962 and mid 1967. They then used Wally Heider's Los Angeles studio between late 1967 and 1969.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 16:44, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

February 2017

Please stop making disruptive edits, as you did at Artpop.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 05:15, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Electropop

OK, I give up and I get it, but please, you cannot block me or ban me from editing. I am not trying to antagonize you and others, be disruptive or start editing conflicts. Sorry if I'm being persistent to you. I can't find any sources for the genre, since it is a pain for me to find better ones. Reply if you may. Aki (talk · contributions). 14:02 (UTC), February 22, 2017 (Wednesday).

Well, the reason why I'm also asking not to block me is because I wanna retain my status as a "block-free" user, fix grammar and punctuation, as well as edit other articles, so please? I am already waiting for you to reply and tell me about the reasons why do you always revert my edits in electropop.

Template:Pink Floyd

Hi, I've had to revert your split of the templates, as the single template approach was agreed by consensus at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 July 27#Template:Pink Floyd singles. --Rob Sinden (talk) 13:58, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation pages

Hello, Ilovetopaint. When you changed Adult-oriented rock into a disambiguation page, you may not have been aware of WP:FIXDABLINKS, which says:

When creating disambiguation pages, fix all resulting mis-directed links.

Before moving an article to a qualified name (in order to create a disambiguation page at the base name, to move an existing disambiguation page to that name, or to redirect that name to a disambiguation page), click on What links here to find all of the incoming links. Repair all of those incoming links to use the new article name.

It would be a great help if you would check the other Wikipedia articles that contain links to "Adult-oriented rock" and fix them to take readers to the correct article. Thanks. R'n'B (call me Russ) 15:18, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

List of independent UK record labels

According to the WP:LISTVERIFY tag you added, all statements in the list need a citation. Mostly out of curiosity, which statement on this list page do you think needs verification? 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 18:13, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

All of them (WP:LSC).--Ilovetopaint (talk) 22:03, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

The Piper At The Gates Of Dawn

Why you undoes my edition? You are a unfair user. The article is supported by the source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.7.89.26 (talk) 02:20, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Because it doesn't actually say any of that in the source.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 02:28, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

But it's supported by the source, my source say "alternative music forms" it say that. You should respect my edit please.

I'll respect your edit if you can quote - verbatim - in which source the phrases "post-punk", "punk", and "indie rock" are used in reference to Piper.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 03:06, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Stop undoes my edition, supported by the source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.7.80.173 (talk) 12:43, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

WP:PROVEIT - you can't, because I already checked, and they never appear.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 12:49, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

You have not checked anything, check again. You in "The Velvet Underground And Nico" also cites unreliable sources like this: "Genres that were significantly informed by the album include art rock, punk, garage, grunge, shoegaze, gothic, indie, and most other forms of alternative music . " The Independent is not a reliable source but nobody undoes your edit but you with me if you do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.7.93.237 (talk) 15:34, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

None of your edits are ever going to be added if you're going to keep ban-evading instead of opening a discussion on the talk page.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 16:22, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

I think

I'd need a reference to the fact that the term "Garage punk" was coined in the 1970s. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 19:16, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

See Garage punk (fusion genre)#Etymology and usage--Ilovetopaint (talk) 07:14, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Songs about places

Hi, Ilovetopaint. I'd like to thank you for all your recent edits on the Category:Songs about places. You came across several articles I didn't even know about or hadn't come up with yet. For some strange reason people are now nominating the category Category:Songs about Argentina for deletion. Could you perhaps come in and share your opinion about the matter, here? [[1]] Many thanks, beforehand. - User:Kjell Knudde, 9:44, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Eugene Landy

The article Eugene Landy 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:Eugene Landy for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Shearonink -- Shearonink (talk) 05:01, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Eugene Landy

	Congratulations, it's a...
	...Wikipedia Good Article!! Shearonink (talk) 06:56, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Eugene Landy

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Eugene Landy 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 Shearonink -- Shearonink (talk) 00:21, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

The article Eugene Landy you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Eugene Landy for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Shearonink -- Shearonink (talk) 07:02, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Ilovetopaint.

You know? I'm bored, you're the only one who undoes my editions and you do not give a reason why you do it, I do not care if you keep doing it I'll create all the accounts that are possible and keep editing all the articles that you do not allow to edit because you are a user Unfair, I'll have your damn account suspended, you'll see. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.11.188.51 (talk) 20:53, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Read WP:EDITWAR.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 21:00, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

@180.11.188.51: Read WP:BURDEN: "The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and is satisfied by providing a citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution.". You've failed to do this over and over again. Almost every edit you've made requires talk page discussion due to the unacceptable sources you provide. I strongly suggest that you improve your critical reading skills before you edit Wikipedia. Maybe take a few more English classes?--Ilovetopaint (talk) 21:12, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Don't bother me, both editions that i do before, this Interstellar Overdrive and this Avant-pop They do not violate the rules you say, however you say that those issues are disruptive and undo, I will not allow that injustice from now on and I have my accounts prepared I will see you in 4 days. I'll have your disgusting account suspended — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.11.188.51 (talk) 21:41, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

"Avant-garde rock" isn't stated in the "Interstellar" source, and "avant-pop" was applied to Barrett's 2 solo albums, not Barrett himself.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 21:43, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

That is what they use as an excuse to undo my editions, barrett only sack 2 albums in his career as a soloist and avant-garde if it is in the source simply you do not read it, anyway as I told you I will not stop, I already have my Accounts ready within 4 days. What you do is an injustice that suspiciously other users do not do with me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.11.188.51 (talk) 21:47, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

I can search through Irregular Head for "avant-garde rock" and nothing comes up. It's not in there. Barrett did not record only 2 albums, he also recorded with Pink Floyd (obviously). And you've had many other nonconstructive run-ins with other editors in the past.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 21:50, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Do not be silly in avant-pop, The source by which he adds to Barrett says that "barrett" and "the madcap laughs" are "avant-pop" albums, these 2 albums are the only records that barrett recorded as a soloist, that's enough to make him an avant-pop artist and in the case of Insterstellar Overdrive the source said "avant-garde rock" but you insist it don't say that. No, so far you are the only one that undo my editions and in the end they end up suspending me because you say that my editions are unacceptable, so that is an injustice that I will not allow now, I already have more than ten accounts within 4 days to follow Editing, I'm not interested if you undo and undo my edits. 180.11.188.51 (talk) 21:58, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

What is the full quote in Irregular Head? And Barrett is not defined by his two studio albums. Even if he was, the source you added was self-published, which is unacceptable.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 05:58, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

The source you quote is totally acceptable, barrett is only defined with 2 discs in his career so it is enough to enter the category avant-pop but suspiciously you are the only one that undoes and undoes my edition. I repeat, I wait four days and I have all my accounts ready to edit, that the administrators realize that when undoing my editions you are committing an injustice and I hope they suspend your damn account. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.7.101.169 (talk) 12:28, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Godspeed!--Ilovetopaint (talk) 13:51, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

I accidentally blocked you

Instead of blocking the IP address that was harassing you, I managed to accidentally block you instead. My most sincere apologies; I've of course unblocked you and you should be good to go. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:27, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

@Oshwah: Can those pages be protected? I put in a request at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#A Saucerful of Secrets . Thanks --Ilovetopaint (talk) 12:38, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)@Oshwah: This is probably the same editor who said both on your user talk and above that he was going to sock in order to force these changes through. I tried to discourage them from doing so, but they seem seem more interested in WP:GWAR than WP:DR. Anyway, they'll probably be back with another IP trying to make the same edits. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:43, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

The editor is better known as Iloveartrock, and they have been engaging in these genre wars since October 2016 (Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Iloveartrock).--Ilovetopaint (talk) 13:26, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

If you haven't see this edit, then it appears your sock may be back. New account with just enough edits made to get around the page protection. You might want to reassess the source cited though because it appears different from the others. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:49, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Invitation to take a look at our first article

We are students writing an article on Alex Mercado as part of our class Academic Discourse and Writing at Tec de Monterrey. Since you are an experienced Wikipedian and have an interest in these kinds of topics, we would like to know if you could take a few moments to take a look at the article and give us feedback. Thank you for your time.--Rodrigo Orellán (talk) 22:24, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Acid rock

The article Acid rock you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Acid rock for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Llywrch -- Llywrch (talk) 06:41, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Soft rock

I do not see a source listed for Soft rock being a pop music subgenre. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.34.179.217 (talk) 19:22, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

It's in the first citation.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 13:04, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Memory Tapes

added links pointing to Rhapsody and The Pitch

Chillwave

added a link pointing to The Pitch

Ducktails (band)

added a link pointing to The Pitch

Small Black

added a link pointing to The Pitch

Washed Out

added a link pointing to The Pitch

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:52, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Ariel Pink

added a link pointing to Idolator

Hypnagogic pop

added a link pointing to Martin Newell

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:46, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Burt Bacharach pruning

Unfortunately, some of your massive pruning of that article was obviously incorrect based on the rationales. There are too many to list here, and many of the citations now need to be restored. A quick example is this one, where you deleted about four very reliable sources, including PBS, actual taped performances, and the Library of Congress, and your rationale said "removed unsourced or poorly sourced." Ironically, only after you removed the sources did they become poorly sourced, not before.

In another example, you deleted a well sourced and common proper term with essentially no rationale except your opinion. In doing so, you removed a reliable source, The Telegraph article, saying it was "somebody's opinion".

Please discuss questionable issues before such massive pruning. Edits to a bio should not be based on anyone's opinions. Thanks.--Light show (talk) 02:33, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

@Light show: I cited WP:RECENTISM for that first example. Those concert performances are nowhere near notable enough for the lead. The other sources I removed were YouTube videos, which were used to verify the fact that a particular single topped US record charts. No doubt that it did, but we don't get that info just from watching Dionne Warwick sing.

And the "Great American Songbook" is a proper term indeed, but it's not a real institution (as far as I know). The Wikipedia article for Great American Songbook states: "There is no consensus on which songs are in the 'Great American Songbook.'" If someone says Bacharach is in some great, imaginary songbook it is then certainly just an opinion. Bacharach is great but I doubt most historians would group "Alfie" with "Stardust".--Ilovetopaint (talk) 02:44, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Sock case page

Please watchlist the new case page at Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Iloveartrock, and refer to it when reverting this person. If the trouble flares up again I think we might be able to get a rangeblock on the Peru IPs but there are so many other IPs mixed in – the person has to be using proxies. Binksternet (talk) 23:08, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gideon Gaye, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Santa Barbara. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:52, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello, I have a request

Could you help me move a page? Cupcakke should be CupcakKe per WP:COMMONAME Any help is appreciated. Thanks. --Aleccat 00:37, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

I'm not Ilovetopaint but I have an observation. The guideline at MOS:TMRULES says we should generally not change normal English styling to conform with unusual styling of a brand. At MOS:MUSICCAPS, the guideline says "Standard English text formatting and capitalization rules apply to the names of bands and individual artists." So it's unlikely that the page Cupcakke will ever be moved to CupcakKe. Binksternet (talk) 04:28, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Category:Film auteurs has been nominated for discussion

Category:Film auteurs, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:20, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Harsh

Hi there, I hope my comment about Cupcakke didn't come off too harsh. I re-read it and it seemed a bit more condescending than I intended. I intended some condescension, just not that much. Anyhow, sorry and regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 10:57, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hypnagogic pop

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Hypnagogic pop 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 Nyuck Nyuck -- Nyuck Nyuck (talk) 13:41, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Psychedelic rock

Hi, Thanks for your suggestions and changes. I see you prefer the general phrase "instrumental sections". Arguably this doesn't contain much information, as instrumental segments can be found in Renaissance, Baroque and Classical vocal music, and in many pop genres. The specific types of instrumental sections--guitar solos and improvised jams--are an identifiable feature of psychedelic rock, as confirmed by the reference. I think that vagueness in leads can be contrary to MOS:LEAD'S instructions to make the lead a standalone intro to the subject. See also WP:Vague introductions, a user essay. Thank you. I hope we can discuss this further. Is there a different wording you would be comfortable with?OnBeyondZebrax • TALK 18:57, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

@OnBeyondZebrax: It doesn't say "instrumental segments", it says "extended instrumental segments". Hicks deliberately chose to word it as (emphasis added) "long instrumental introductions or codas or inserting long solos or 'jams.'" Rock music didn't have extended form until psychedelia came along, which is a greater point to make than "psychedelic rock has long guitar jams". It's not always about the guitars - there's tons of examples where the vocals drop out for spacey organs, tape loops, or something similar. --Ilovetopaint (talk) 00:37, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Cold and Bouncy

added a link pointing to Jim O'Rourke

Easy listening

added a link pointing to Good music

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:54, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Atom Heart Mother, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:11, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

"Our Prayer" edit

You reverted an edit I made to the Beach Boys' "Our Prayer" stating, "We don't need to cite his full name every single time." I understand that and that is not why the edit was made. The article is referring to several people with the last name Wilson and then you say "...without involvement from Wilson" and it is unclear which Wilson you are referring to. By adding his first name, the reader knows who you are referring to. Without the edit, they could think you mean without Carl Wilson's involvement...or without Dennis Wilson's involvement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dwilliamsiddall (talk • contribs) 12:07, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sean O'Hagan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jean Pierre Muller. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:56, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:People associated with Pink Floyd

Template:People associated with Pink Floyd has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:32, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Eco Virtual

Hey! I was curious if maybe it would be worthwhile to bring Eco Virtual back as an article. I have my original draft saved on a user subpage although it may lack the necessary citations unless I can scrounge up better references.-🐦Do☭torWho42 (📼) 18:20, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

You're asking the wrong person as I'm not a fan of vaporwave and don't know anything about Eco Virtual.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 09:37, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs#RfC: Should Infobox song and Infobox album be merged?

Hello. May you please close the RfC discussion as withdrawn? Seems that the majority/consensus is against the merger of "infobox song" and "infobox album". --George Ho (talk) 18:00, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

The RfC has only been up for a couple days. Nobody except Gorlitz has offered a counterargument ("it makes things too complicated") and even he may be in the process of reconsidering.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 20:19, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

How is mine? --George Ho (talk) 03:03, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

I may request to withdraw it tomorrow, but only under the condition that the closure reflects a premature "no consensus". I'll try another proposal sometime after Song/Single are merged.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 20:58, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Synth-pop article simplify

Hello, thank you for fixing my edit on Talk Talk. Could you simplify "synth-pop is a subgenre of new wave" Thank you, it would help a lot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.34.179.217 (talk) 18:37, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Smiley Smile

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Smiley Smile 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 Homeostasis07 -- Homeostasis07 (talk) 01:40, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Unexplained reversion

Why did you revert this? WhatamIdoing (talk) 07:23, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Because that's not what the song is about and it was unsourced to begin with.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 07:46, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Oh, I see. I was looking at the revised lyrics, which include lines such as "For this daring young star/Met his death while in his car". The content of the original is rather different. It is typical to include some mention of what the song is about in an encyclopedia article. How would you describe it?

(Even if there's no 'little blue clicky number' at the end of a description, basic facts about lyrics and the plot of fictional books are generally assumed to be verifiABLE in the original work even when not individually cited. "<ref>The song</ref> is normally considered superfluous, although in this particular instance, a URL to the lyrics would have shown you which version of the song I was looking at.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:57, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Poems would be a better point of comparison, not fictional books (or linear narratives, as you probably mean). Wikipedia is not the place for editors to interpret poems/lyrics. If it's exceedingly obvious what a song is about, then the reader will also know just by listening. But we can't just definitively say that "Their Hearts Were Full of Spring" is about two hearts being full of spring. Your confusion between the song and "A Young Man Is Gone" is a perfect example of why it's bad to presume these things without verification.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 20:51, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Of course you shouldn't "interpret" a primary source, but you can certainly summarize it.

Again, it is typical to include some mention of what the song is about in an encyclopedia article. The article is incomplete without this information. So how would you describe its contents? WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:56, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Smiley Smile

The article Smiley Smile 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:Smiley Smile for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Homeostasis07 -- Homeostasis07 (talk) 16:20, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Smiley Smile

The article Smiley Smile you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Smiley Smile for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Homeostasis07 -- Homeostasis07 (talk) 00:02, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for the work you've been doing, appreciate it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:145:701:D110:E9BF:ABA7:2DD0:AF1E (talk) 12:39, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Nota bene

Template:Nota bene has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:31, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Charles Manson

Apologies; my mistake. I should have checked the history more closely. --MelanieN (talk) 14:05, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Smiley Smile

On 16 June 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Smiley Smile, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Beach Boys' experimental album Smiley Smile (1967) was used by some rehab centers to help ease patients off drugs? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Smiley Smile. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Smiley Smile), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.

Mifter (talk) 00:13, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The Beach Boys (touring band)

Hello, Ilovetopaint. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, The Beach Boys (touring band), for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

1. edit the page
2. remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
3. save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

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

–XboxGamer22408^talk 18:13, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Removed my edit twice on Vaporwave

I made two edits. For the first one, here, I added Whitewoods then linked to their Youtube page. I see how it was fair that you did that.

But for the second here, I linked to another Wikipedia page where it EXPLICITLY said "* There is a vaporwave band named Whitewoods"

And if you even take 5 minutes away from removing my legitimate edits and listened to Whitewoods, you would understand that it 100% follows the Genre and art style of Vaporwave.

Please read WP:OR and WP:CIRCULAR to see why your edits were undone. You need a reliable source that explicitly states "Whitewoods is a vaporwave band" to add them to the article. Otherwise the list could be used to advertise millions of trivial Soundcloud pages.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 16:06, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Syd Barrett

Hey, I don't really carer either way, except for the correct way, I made my revert based on the article's history [2], [3], [4] two of those are your revisions and one is Binksternet so I figured I was good, now I know. Cheers, - FlightTime (open channel) 01:14, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

That issue wearies me. The way I understand it, if the biographical subject has stated a strong national identity or preference then the word "British" is exchanged for the preferred nationality. Or if the majority of reliable sources say "quintessentially English", "died-in-the-wool Scottish", etc, etc.

Synthwave (2000s genre)

If you would have actually read the mark up of the section you'd see why the information was removed. It says " ANY ADDITIONS REQUIRE A WIKI-ARTICLE

• If there is notability and some third-party reporting on the artist then create a wiki-article (consider creating a new section on the talk page so that other editors can help you out)
• If there is no wiki-article, you need to wait before adding the band/musician.
• Bandcamp does not qualify as a third-party source!

PLEASE READ THE ABOVE BEFORE ADDING ARTISTS"

So, yeah...

^{(talk page stalker)} CrashUnderride 12:56, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Category:Albums produced by the Beach Boys has been nominated for discussion

Category:Albums produced by the Beach Boys, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:48, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

June 2017

Your recent editing history at Template:Pink Floyd shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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. See BRD for 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. - FlightTime (open channel) 17:01, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Ilovetopaint reported by User:FlightTime (Result: ). Thank you. - FlightTime (open channel) 17:11, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Guitar pop (disambiguation) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Guitar pop (disambiguation) 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/Guitar pop (disambiguation) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Widefox; talk 15:54, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

The Good Article Nominations Page Needs Your Help!

Good Articles: Music needs the help of willing reviewers!

Hi there. You nominated an article for evaluation against the good article criteria some time ago, but I noticed you have yet to review an article yourself. Although it's not mandatory, it would be helpful if every user who creates a nomination also reviewed at least one other article, as this would help clear the massive backlog. Reviewing someone else's article can also help you in the long run: every article reviewed brings yours one position closer to the top of the nominations list! If you worked on the article you nominated, chances are you're already familiar with the six good article criteria. It really isn't hard to review, and may take an experienced editor only a few hours to complete. If you have the time and would like to help, please click here, take a moment to figure out which article you'd like to review, then click on its (start review) button. Thank you for reading, and if you need assistance with your review at any point, please feel free to leave a message on my talk page and I'll respond to you as soon as I can. Homeostasis07 (talk)

A page you started (Recording studio as musical instrument) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Recording studio as musical instrument, Ilovetopaint!

Wikipedia editor Nick Moyes just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Nice article - it might make a great 'Did You Know'

To reply, leave a comment on Nick Moyes's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Nick Moyes (talk) 22:45, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Bobby Jameson

The album Songs of Protest and Anti-Protest is not often mentioned anywhere. It's still pretty obscure. On the rare occasions when it is mentioned, or reviewed in its own right, I accept that it is often compared to Forever Changes... but in my view that does not justify the unqualified use of the word "often" in the way you have used it. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:48, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

I don't know how you are getting "Songs of Protest is often the subject of review" from "Songs of Protest is often compared to ..." when an earlier sentence explicitly says that it merely has a cult following.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 17:11, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

It's the use of the word "often" that is confusing. The album is very rarely reviewed at all, so claiming that it is "often" compared to another album is wrong. And the text doesn't, in fact, say that the album has a cult following - it says that Jameson acquired a cult following. (Though I'm not sure that's true.) Still, I know there are more important things to worry about. Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:29, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

PS: This edit misses the point. The reason I raised the issue was simply to question your edit here, where you included the word "often". It's still wrong to include the word "often", and I don't see how your latest wording is an improvement. Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:44, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Season Cycle - XTC.ogg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:52, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:That's Really Super Supergirl - XTC.ogg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:56, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Electronic music#Sub-project EDM

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Electronic music#Sub-project EDM as a participant of WP:WikiProject Electronic music. - TheMagnificentist 13:42, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hypnagogic pop

The article Hypnagogic pop you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Hypnagogic pop for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Nyuck Nyuck -- Nyuck Nyuck (talk) 21:02, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Don't fuck with the formula

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Don't fuck with the formula 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 Ribbet32 -- Ribbet32 (talk) 20:41, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Don't fuck with the formula

The article Don't fuck with the formula 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:Don't fuck with the formula for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ribbet32 -- Ribbet32 (talk) 21:21, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Don't fuck with the formula

The article Don't fuck with the formula you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Don't fuck with the formula for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ribbet32 -- Ribbet32 (talk) 04:21, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Smiley Smile

Just checking that you have seen the latest comments on the FAC? I think we're just waiting for a response from you now. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:33, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Category:Panda Bear (musician) has been nominated for discussion

Category:Panda Bear (musician), which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 17:58, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Art pop

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Art pop 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 Retrohead -- Retrohead (talk) 09:41, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

A page you started (Art into Pop) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Art into Pop, Ilovetopaint!

Wikipedia editor Mduvekot just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thanks!

To reply, leave a comment on Mduvekot's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Mduvekot (talk) 20:01, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

A page you started (Gene Sculatti) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Gene Sculatti, Ilovetopaint!

Wikipedia editor Mduvekot just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thanks!

To reply, leave a comment on Mduvekot's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Mduvekot (talk) 20:03, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Art pop

The article Art pop 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:Art pop for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Retrohead -- Retrohead (talk) 15:21, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Art pop

The article Art pop you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Art pop for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Retrohead -- Retrohead (talk) 17:41, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Don't fuck with the formula at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 12:12, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Don't fuck with the formula

Hello! Your submission of Don't fuck with the formula at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! GorillaWarfare (talk) 21:51, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Yacht rock, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Joe Jackson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:07, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Eugene Landy and Brian Wilson.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eugene Landy and Brian Wilson.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) 17:24, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Electronic Dance Metal

Can you please elaborate and help to better form the paragraph instead of removing it from Electronics in rock music? All the information in the paragraph is true, not sure what you mean with deriving conclusions not stated by the sources. If you can help me rephrase the paragraph in a better way so we can keep the information in the article that would be wonderful. Thank you.

91.34.30.13 (talk) 11:49, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Charles Manson

Your on 3RR Darkness Shines (talk) 00:06, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Ilovetopaint. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Nonsuch (album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Humanity (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:18, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of The High Llamas

Hello! Your submission of The High Llamas at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! /~huesatlum/ 02:59, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Ringo Starr

Hi, Ilovetopiant. Re your recennt edit here, I wondered what was your rationale? I've been engaged in a discussion about the use of "Sir" at User talk:Phinn#Barry Gibb. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:54, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

@Martinevans123: Because "Ringo Starr" is a stage name, it would be the same thing as retitling the infobox as "Richard 'Ringo Starr' Starkey", which is improper.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 16:59, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

I can understand that quite well, although I'm not sure that would be "the same thing" at all. I was just baffled by seeing no explanatory edit summary. Has this occurred elsewhere? I somehow suspect, however, that Starkey will indeed by known to all and sundry as "Sir Ringo Starr". Martinevans123 (talk) 17:06, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Not even Paul McCartney's infobox is shown as "Sir Paul McCartney" - it has it, but relegated to |honorific_prefix= which I'm not sure is in the music artist template.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 17:08, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

You're suggesting that Paul McCartney is a stage name? But he does quite plainly have "Sir" on the line above his name in the infobox? Martinevans123 (talk) 17:11, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

It has "sir", but relegated to |honorific_prefix=, which I have verified is in the music artist template. --Ilovetopaint (talk) 17:14, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Um, yes, that seems perfectly fair and consistent. User:Phinn seems to think it should never be |honorific_prefix=, but always emboldened as part of the name. Is this something which varies between infoboxes? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:18, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

I don't know. But the parameter exists for a reason. If it's not supposed to be used, then they should RfC it out of the template.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 17:19, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Good point. I've asked a question over at Template talk:Infobox person anyway, Feel free to comment there if you wish. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:21, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

January 2018

Your recent editing history at Bohemian Rhapsody shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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. See BRD for 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. - FlightTime (open channel) 22:17, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Quick thanks!

Thanks for correcting my statement on the Love & Mercy article Talk page. As I was making the comment I thought I should check the DVD to make sure I was remembering correctly. Decided to wait until morning and, if in error, just delete my comment. You beat me to it, so to speak. It was a good reminder for me to slow down a bit when doing such things. Hope all is well.THX1136 (talk) 22:30, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 4

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

XTC (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Depression, The Stranger, New York and CBS Records

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Varg Vikernes

I see you have an interest in many articles of this nature. You've edited the article extensively, there are numerous sources describing him as a Neo-Nazi, White Nationalist. If you want the article to look like the article on Rational Wiki, force me to spend more time on this article. Because I'll find the God Damn sources and rewrite the whole damn thing. Or you can leave the CAT in there and stop trying to whitewash a Nazi's article. Dave Dial (talk) 22:26, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Dave Dial (talk) 23:25, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

David Gilmour and Rick Wright's comments on "Animals"

The idea that the pink boxes with comments that are interpreted on the talk page as being juicy personal attacks on Roger Waters should be removed was not mine. I never said it was libellous, but what I did say is that it could be POTENTIALLY libellous. 21:49, 16 January 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.69.217.3 (talk)

Your GA nomination of Chillwave

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Chillwave 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 Mike Christie -- Mike Christie (talk) 13:01, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Chillwave

The article Chillwave 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:Chillwave for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Mike Christie -- Mike Christie (talk) 14:21, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of John Maus

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article John Maus 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 Zawl -- Zawl (talk) 12:41, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 27

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Cold wave (music) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Cracked

Shoegazing (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to My Bloody Valentine

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:25, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of John Maus

The article John Maus you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:John Maus for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zawl -- Zawl (talk) 10:41, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Chillwave

The article Chillwave you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Chillwave for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Mike Christie -- Mike Christie (talk) 00:41, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Sunflower personnel

There is a now defunct blog about The Beach Boys recording "Sunflower" and it indicates that Dennis did in fact contribute percussion and organ, and the other individual song articles do in fact indicate that Dennis was on drums and Bruce Johnston played bass and keyboards. 203.221.128.210 (talk) 04:22, 4 February 2018 (UTC)