Talk:MØ

MØ discography

 *  Support split - Discography section is becoming long and should be split to a new article entitled MØ discography. --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:36, 7 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Oppose not that large compared to the rest of the article. There are less than 5,000 bytes of readable prose size currently. Chase (talk &#124; contributions) 23:12, 7 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Oppose - per Chase's comment. --RockyMM (talk) 16:02, 1 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Oppose based on prose size. Widefox ; talk 01:09, 17 October 2015 (UTC)


 *  Support split - The discography section takes up most of the article and that isn't the main point of the article. The article describes her life and what goes on in it. If they wanted to know about her singles and albums, they would look up her discography. Besides, I think a 4x Platinum Recording Artist deserves their own article about their discography. She's been around for four years. --Javila200084898 (talk) 23:34, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Pronunciation
Please could someone add pronunciation of "MØ" to the lead if you get a chance? Cheers! &#8209;&#8209; Yodin T 20:51, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

You can look it up on YouTube... Where MØ pronoces her own name Aperson102 (talk) 01:13, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Agreed that actual pronunciation would assist this article -- added audio link that removes all interpretation as being superior to a link to how the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) approximates Danish pronunciations. If you disagree, please talk here, rather than just erasing this comment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8806:3100:7F:71C3:D1B0:B24F:EBB7 (talk) 21:54, 18 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, there is a single user who keeps removing this information, which is the most requested Google search leading to this page. I hope s/he will stop.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnycakes999 (talk • contribs) 18:52, 22 December 2017 (UTC)


 * It wasn't just me, other users have disputed your changes by either removing the video or converting it to a footnote, and when your edits are disputed, you're not supposed to keep restoring them (see WP:BRD), considering there was never a formal discussion or consensus regarding this particular issue. Wikipedia has guidelines, in case you haven't familiarized yourself with those. All information must be verified by footnotes, regardless if it's a "highly sought after piece of information" or "the #1 Google search". Footnotes are not "non-discriptive" and using them is not "suppressing" information. It doesn't matter if you think a particular piece of information should be featured prominently in a page, that's not how Wikipedia works, and you're not being constructive at all.  snap snap  (talk) 19:32, 22 December 2017 (UTC)


 * No, if you look through the edits you will see that you are the only one making this repeated change although once it was done by a hidden IP address. We had this discussion back in January on this page and the consensus was against your position, although somehow much of that has been removed through editing.  Please permit this page to be a source of information to all by not removing this information again.  Thank you.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnycakes999 (talk • contribs) 19:47, 22 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Did you even bother to check the links I provided above? User:Maczkopeti has converted the pronunciation video to a footnote twice (here and here), while User:Hddty. removed it completely (here). The discussion we had in January (which wasn't even a formal talk page discussion) was about whether or not the video should be included at all. When other users converted the video to a footnote, you simply reverted them without providing a reason whatsoever. I'm not removing any information; the reference is still there, in the form of a footnote. And what part of "do not revert back to your disputed changes" don't you get? We're not supposed to engage in an edit war, and you're not supposed to keep restoring your disputed changes when no consensus has been reached, without even providing an edit summary. Instead, you're continuously choosing to ignore Wikipedia's guidelines. You're clearly not here to be constructive.  snap snap  (talk) 20:20, 22 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry this has caused you to get so upset. Please calm down so that we may discuss this like adults.  Thank you.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnycakes999 (talk • contribs) 22:17, 22 December 2017 (UTC)


 * That's what I've been trying to do for the past few hours, yet you continue to ignore every point I make. Now that the page is protected for two weeks, perhaps you'll make time to familiarize yourself with Wikipedia guidelines (especially WP:CS) in order to avoid making unconstructive changes in the future.  snap snap  (talk) 02:08, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

This issue was brought up in the MO fan group page. I volunteered to assist. There is nothing inappropriate about having a sourced YouTube link that is a video of MO herself stating her name. This is not a self-post YouTube page, but rather "from the horse's mouth" so to speak. I don't particularly like the YouTube clip that Johnny Cake's selected and have used an interview style clip instead. As indicated in iHeart TOS, linking is permissible.

While some may hold YouTube links in disgust, they are permissible in Wikipedia. Please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Video_links

Finally, the YouTube link is properly formatted. Please see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:YouTube GainesvilleFlorida (talk) 03:54, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

So, the issue gets discussed off-wiki, and after the protection expires, you come in as a new editor to start the same edit war? Did you see why this page was protected in the first place? I have reverted your edit, and protected the page again.

Now you people FIRST get to a consensus here, and then have it changed through an edit-protect-request. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:47, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 9 July 2016

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Not moved due to the title being an acronym. See MOS:CAPSACRS (non-admin closure).  Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )   14:17, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

MØ → Mø – Because her name is pronounced as "moe", shouldn't the "ø" be lowercase? 67.87.222.82 (talk) 13:54, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * How would that be relevant to the article's title? Nohomersryan (talk) 15:40, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Support – Because of her name's pronunciation 74.90.58.22 (talk) 20:49, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose – This article's title is an acronym (Marie Ørstad), so "MØ" is acceptable. Titling this article "Mø" would be contrary to the rules established at MOS:CAPSACRS: Do not write acronyms that are pronounced as if they were a word with an initial capital letter only, e.g. do not write UNESCO as Unesco, or NASA as Nasa.  Taylor Trescott  - my talk + my edits 21:42, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose per MOS:CAPSACRS; acronyms should not be lowercased unless and until they have been reinterpreted and assimilated deeply into English as everyday words, like "laser" and "radar". PS: Danish ø is not pronounced /o/ anyway; see Danish orthography (not that, as the first respondent pointed out, this would make any difference for the RM question anyway).  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  20:18, 13 July 2016 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Orphaned references in MØ
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of MØ's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "BPI": From 2015 in British music charts:  From Charli XCX discography:  From Spice Girls: UK Sales certificates database. British Phonographic Industry. Retrieved 25 November 2009.  From Justin Bieber discography:  From List of music recording certifications:  From Ed Sheeran discography:  From List of UK Singles Chart number ones of the 2010s:  <li>From British Phonographic Industry: </li> <li>From DJ Snake: </li> </ul>

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:38, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Instruments - Piano?
Are there any sources that say she plays the piano? Nicholas S8 (talk) 01:44, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation Punkroku = ̵tImposterMO̵ t̵
tImposterMO̵ t̵ is a handle I use it is a strikethru lowercase t looks like the japanese MO character the M IMPOSTER THETA is a STRIKE THRU CAPITAL O. ImposterMO! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C51:7001:200:9151:271F:43C6:78FB (talk) 14:59, 29 August 2019 (UTC)