User talk:Benmite/Archive 2

A Dobos torte for you!

 * I literally have no clue what a dobos torte is but thank you anyway I'm honored ben ǝʇᴉɯ  02:15, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

New article
Hi, I am new to Wikipedia and I don’t know how to start, I wanted to makeup a page about an artist. Can you help ? Nerdmaniac2021 (talk) 01:38, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * : Of course! I can definitely help you out. I'd suggest you start by taking a look here, and you should make sure that the artist for whom you want to create the article meets the requirements set forth here. Who are you trying to write about? ben ǝʇᴉɯ  02:14, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi thanks for responding ! The artist I am talking about is Jonn Poker (without the h) ! Would you say we could create a page about them ? Nerdmaniac2021 (talk) 03:52, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * No. He is not notable and you are evading your many global locks. --IWI (talk) 22:57, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Top 25 feedback
Someone complained about one of your write-ups, if you're willing to defend yourself or something like that... igordebraga ≠ 06:21, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * : Thanks for letting me know. If I had known Gina was such an avid reader of the Signpost, I might have made the entry a bit harsher! ben ǝʇᴉɯ  23:51, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Gigi Goode
Hello! Hoping Talk:Gigi Goode/GA1 has not fallen off your radar. Thanks! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 12:18, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 15
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gerald Clayton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Peter Bernstein.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:27, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 8
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Upsahl, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arista.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:53, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Girls in the Hood
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Girls in the Hood 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 Kyle Peake -- Kyle Peake (talk) 09:41, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mood (song)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mood (song) 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 MarioSoulTruthFan -- MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 11:01, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mood (song)
The article Mood (song) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Mood (song) 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 MarioSoulTruthFan -- MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 12:41, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Regarding Mood
Hi there!

I closed the review, so I will try to answer all your questions here. If I missed something let me know. First of all, let me apologize for those "harsh" comments, I didn't mean to hurt anyone or make anyone feel terrible.

For instance 360 magazine (not sure it is a reliable source), The 25 Best Rock Songs of 2020: Staff Picks" by who? reference 30 missing date, source 31 missing author, and so on. But this is normal even someone with years of experience misses this kind of stuff and it's not worrying, but along with everything else is just more stuff to add to the pile. The remix indeed charted, see 1, so it's more than a gut feeling. Yes, I am, sources need to be to the "dug" to the fullest, every bit of information present on those sources is viable, I believe there are more. Those came from like the first two Google pages, I'm 100% sure there is more since the song topped various charts. You can't use component charts see Record charts, for further information. This is not even up to debate. The wikilink you presented are the components of Hot 100, the Billboard Hip-Hop/R&B Songs has its own components charts, one being Rap Songs. In the wikilink I provided you will find all the necessary information and understand what can be added and what can't.

Yes, you should include the information of all releases radio, streaming, and digital on the prose as well. Everything should be included, dates, labels, formats, countries, original or remix. The personnel also needs to be mentioned on the prose, I gave you one source for it because the one on Tidal is incomplete. Billboard has it to the fullest. It's mostly regarding, broadness in coverage and some unreliable sources and some of Mos is also not correct. But after you work on the article submit it to the Guild of Copy Editors before nominating again to GA, they can help out with that. Don't make the Background section a huge paragraph. See 1, 2 and 3 to get a good grasp of what we look upon on a GA, these are FA's, however, if you aim higher you can't miss the rank below. Do you understand? These guidelines will also help you WikiProject Albums/Album article style advice, they also work for songs.

Like I said media is not mandatory but perhaps a sample of the song, see WP:Sample can help to illustrate something that words on their own won't be able to explain. Once more, not mandatory but it makes the article look nicer. BTW if you can't find much information regarding the remix I would suggest adding that to the main article with a separation of a paragraph. Like "The original version XYZ. On the other hand, the remix...KYZ". Hopefully, I get my points across. Something else, I forgot to mention but try to nominate an article at the time since you are new to the GA's and that will help you to understand the diferences between the articles. On top of that, take your time to improve the article, don't rush it. Believe me, I have been there.

As a matter of fact, after improvements on the article and a GOCE is done, let me know. Ping me if you need me to clarify something or if I missed something. Cheers, MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 21:25, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Cry (Ashnikko song)
The article Cry (Ashnikko song) 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:Cry (Ashnikko song) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of VersaceSpace -- VersaceSpace (talk) 08:18, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Pendulum
Hello, I simply would like to inform you that your move of Pendulum (drum and bass band) to Pendulum (Australian band) was unjust. Whilst, yes, usually nationality is reflected in disambiguation, the other band named Pendulum was also Australian. Hence, genres are the next best thing to use. The other band also made a form of electronic music, so it has to be more specific than that.  Lazz _R  21:31, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi there, that was my mistake. I was trying to be bold and move the page based on WP:BANDDAB but I hadn't seen that the other band was also Australian. If you want to request a move to move it back to its original location, that's fine. ben ǝʇᴉɯ  22:48, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Pinging . ben ǝʇᴉɯ  22:48, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Girls in the Hood
The article Girls in the Hood 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:Girls in the Hood for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kyle Peake -- Kyle Peake (talk) 08:01, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Hey, it's been days now so I will ask how long until you fix the remaining issues? --K. Peake 15:34, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi there, I've been really busy lately. I'll try to get around to fixing them tomorrow. ben ǝʇᴉɯ  04:52, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Thrill Kill
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Thrill Kill 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 FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 01:01, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Your DRN case
Hello, Benmite. I wanted to let you know that your DRN request was accepted and a discussion has started. If you would like to participate, please head on over to the discussion and let us know why you believe the disputed material improved the article.

If you no longer want to participate, that's okay too, just let me know and I'll close the request. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants  Tell me all about it.  19:55, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Guidance: ten year test/unduly negative
Coming out of left field here—Hi there I stumbled across the dispute resolution notice concerning James Charles, and it struck a chord. Why? Because I almost exclusively edit political BLP articles and I've seen this quite frequently: someone (sometimes allegedly) tweeted X in the past (or present) and several stories are published. In other cases, someone said Y and it's blown up into a controversy and published by local papers. That being said, I have never seen the WP:TENYEARTEST or "undue negativity" (not talking about WP:UNDUE) used to remove content in political BLP articles. To me, it seems that one could assert that virtually anything could fail the ten year test, and especially push for the deletion of negativity if it's unduly negative, no? Obviously if criminality is involved, then it's absolutely worth mentioning. I'll be eagerly awaiting for the results of the dispute, but wanted to know what your guidance would be to a user who is still learning. Thanks! -PerpetuityGrat (talk) 18:34, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
 * : Hi there! My advice would be to rely on how prevalent information about certain controversies is in reliable sources. I've mainly been pushing for the inclusion of the Ebola tweet and the "Mugshot Challenge" in the James Charles article since, from perusing reliable sources used in the article and sources from elsewhere, those are two things I've seen pop up quite frequently. There are obviously other, less notable controversies that are covered in exhaustive lists of every scandal Charles has ever been involved in, but if no RSs have written articles focused mostly or entirely on them, and any mention of them in any source is mostly passing, then I can understand why it would be seen as unduly negative to include them. I agree that the ten-year test could be used to say that anything shouldn't be included in any article, since it's completely open to interpretation, which is why I mentioned in the discussion about Charles that the test is hypothetical, and it's not actually required that ten years pass for information to be added. I think that, if something or someone is being discussed weeks, months, years after it first happened/they first became notable, then you can get closer to answering the question of how relevant certain information might be in the future. ben ǝʇᴉɯ  04:14, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Just looking at other articles here like Jeffree_Star. In the controversies section (poorly named section) there are repeated sentences of person X said Star is Y, or "Star has used racial slurs on multiple occasions." Are these going to be notable in ten years? I mean really who knows, but I'd guess not. -PerpetuityGrat (talk) 19:56, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

June 2021
Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at James Charles (Internet personality). Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ''Stop. Without consensus and multiple RS, this should not be added.'' —valereee (talk) 00:16, 12 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I'm getting very concerned that you don't understand that dob is a privacy issue. Do you understand this? —valereee (talk) 01:33, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I have already explained in great detail how the issue of privacy is not applicable here as the only reason Charles's birth date is known to begin with is because he published it himself on social media and elsewhere. This is not his address, his social security number, or anything else that could reasonably be inferred to be an invasion of privacy. It is his birthday and it has been reliably sourced. You have failed to respond to my assertion that WP:DOB states that it does not need to be widely reported in reliable sources if the sources used make it clear that this information is public, and you have yet to explain what is being protected by not adding a birth date when you've left the year there anyway. I also would appreciate if you could be more respectful in your communication with me, instead of implying that I am incapable of understanding how Wikipedia's policies work. ben ǝʇᴉɯ  01:45, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * @Benmite, I don't think you're incapable of understanding policy. I think that you have a very strong POV about this article for whatever reason and you're allowing that to affect your interpretation of BLP policies. We always want to err on the conservative side when it comes to BLPs. We don't always include everything we can find. That's because we're dealing with actual human people who can feel things and be harmed by the information we present. —valereee (talk) 09:56, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , saying that you believe my judgment is too heavily influenced by my own bias to properly interpret Wikipedia's policies actually is akin to saying that I am incapable of correctly interpreting or understanding Wikipedia's policies. My stance is based on policy, which I repeated twice on Charles's talk page and then once again in my last message to you, and which has also been reiterated by another uninvolved user on said talk page and still has yet to be acknowledged by you. I can bring this issue up on the the dispute resolution noticeboard, though it seems you already alluded to it. ben ǝʇᴉɯ  10:23, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * What other user? I already responded to Politanum, if that's what you meant? —valereee (talk) 10:34, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm saying you have yet to acknowledge the part of WP:DOB that I've repeatedly outlined. ben ǝʇᴉɯ  10:39, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I've answered about the dob at article talk, I think we should keep that discussion there. But about the POV: that's not correct. Many editors have certain areas where they feel so strongly about a particular subject that their interpretation of policy suffers. It doesn't mean they aren't capable of understanding policy. It just means that in that area, they may need to err on the side of interpreting more conservatively. You do seem to have a strong POV about this particular subject. —valereee (talk) 10:51, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I can assure you that the only thing influencing my beliefs about his date of birth are the articles that list his date of birth as May 23, 1999 and his own confirmation of his date of birth as May 23, 1999. I would also prefer to move any further discussion about this away from here and to the DRN. ben ǝʇᴉɯ  11:17, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Thot shit
Nice job, all the more so given the time span. Thanks! ---Sluzzelin talk  20:11, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much! I try, hehe. ben ǝʇᴉɯ  02:05, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Girls in the Hood
The article Girls in the Hood you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Girls in the Hood for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kyle Peake -- Kyle Peake (talk) 18:21, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, you still around? My GAN review of Thrill Kill is done, awaiting response. FunkMonk (talk) 20:00, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 7
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Thot Shit, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Complex.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Thrill Kill
The article Thrill Kill you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Thrill Kill for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 08:02, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Talk:Juicy (Doja Cat song)/GA1
Benmite, just a reminder that you still have this review open, and that the nominator does not appear to have addressed the issues you raised over two months ago. If you're no longer interested in continuing (or closing) the review, I'll be happy to close it for you. Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:50, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, I was planning on closing it myself since hasn't indicated that he'll be making the necessary changes to the article, and that he seems to be taking a bit of a hiatus from Wikipedia in general. However, if you want to do the honors, it would be appreciated. Thanks!  ben ǝʇᴉɯ  19:12, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Benmite, I'm perfectly happy for you to do it; I don't particularly need to. If you'd prefer not to or can't do it soon, I wanted to make sure it got done. Tell you what. If it hasn't been closed after another 24 hours have passed, I'll take care of it. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:32, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

 * , I never responded to this, but thanks so much! At first, I felt special because I thought I was the only one who you gave it to, but then I realized the whole purpose of the barnstar is to celebrate teamwork so that wouldn't make much sense. Anyway, I appreciate it. ben ǝʇᴉɯ  05:49, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

HoYeon Jung page
Greetings! I've noticed your recent contributions to the HoYeon Jung page and I just wanted to say I think some of the things you moved slightly messed up what was previously there before. While reading it, I noticed most of the content doesn't really fall under the acting section, which is why I believe it needs to be fixed. I've undone it, but you can go back and add the new context but please make sure anything make sense and goes where it needs to be. Btspurplegalaxy (talk) 04:06, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Associated act
Hi. Regarding Arca (musician) page, I believe Björk counts in the category of "Acts with which this act has collaborated on multiple occasions, or on an album, or toured with as a single collaboration act playing together" + Arca wasn't just a producer of her albums therefore they can be considered as an "associated act". ภץאคгöร 19:32, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Trillfendi (talk) 19:11, 21 October 2021 (UTC)