User talk:FarisLloyd

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, FarisLloyd. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:


 * avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
 * propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the request edit template);
 * disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Conflict of interest);
 * avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
 * do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 08:16, 26 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Hey thanks for the heads up! But I don’t have any sort of relationship with Cher I just know her manager. I am not on Wikipedia to promote her but rather to update and keep up to date info about her career. No sort of relegation ship with Cher! FarisLloyd (talk) 08:19, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Your own words: "I am one of Cher's leading street teams (fan groups) to promote her and her music. I have direct connections to her manager and get exclusive info on new releases etc." Your relationship is EXACTLY what indicates that you have a conflict of interest, and need to declare this on your User page. You can use the template mentioned in in the post from Theroadislong or your own words, but do it. David notMD (talk) 08:43, 26 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi FarisLloyd. Thank you for clarifying your connection to Lloyd. To further elaborate on what and  already posted above, you are certainly going to be considered to have a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest with respect to anything written about Lloyd in any articles (including articles about her music, etc.) based upon what you posted at the Teahouse,; so, despite what you might've been asked to do by Lloyd's team, you shouldn't really be directly editing any such content yourself and instead should be following the guidance given in Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. You also might even be considered to be subject to Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure if you're being compensated (including in a non-monetary way) for your editing of content about Lloyd. My suggestion to you would be to stop directly editing any articles about Lloyd until you sort things out, and instead request/propose changes on the relevant article talk pages. My guess is that neither you nor Lloyd's team were aware of this Wikipedia's position on conflict or interest and compensated editing and that's OK; however, now that you're aware of the situatio, you're going to be expected to follow relevant policies and guidelines.In addition, you might want to take a look at Wikipedia:Ownership of content and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons and let Lloyd's team know about what written on those two pages. They need to understand that Cher Lloyd is a Wikipedia article written about Lloyd; it isn't written for her or on behalf of her. It's not particularly written to make her look good or bad, but rather it's only written in a neutral way to reflect what reliable sources have said about her. This means that neither she, her team, nor anyone editing at the request of her team has any sort of editorial control over anything written about Lloyd on Wikipedia. Only content that is deemed to comply with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines (even if it's unfavorable content) will be considered acceptable, and any disputes or disagreements over article content are going to be expected to be resolved per Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.Now, about the photo currently being used in the article. If Lloyd or her team is unhappy with the photo, they can provide a more recent one if they like. All they will need to do is have someone take her photo and then upload it to Wikimedia Commons under one of the licenses that Commons accepts. They need to understand that Commons only accepts photos whose licensing pretty much allows anyone anywhere in the world to download the photo and use in anyway (including for commercial and derivative use); so, they won't be able to place lots of restrictions (e.g. "for non-commercial use only", "for Wikipedia use only") on the reuse of the photo except perhaps to require that the copyright holder be properly attributed each time the file is reused. They also need to understand that once they upload a file to Commons under an acceptable license, they can't change their mind at a later date and cancel the license. If her team understands and accepts these conditions, then uploading a new photo of Lloyd might be much easier to do that trying to use an existing photo of Lloyd that was taken by someone else. -- Marchjuly (talk) 15:07, 26 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Okay this all kind of blew up in my face haha, I don't have any direct relations to Cher. I simply know her manager. I told him I can no longer help in terms of requests but I still will be keeping her wiki page up to date without the assistance of her manager. This is definitely not a conflict of interest because I am being completely neutral when editing her wiki pages and not being biased at all so I'd appreciate these claims to be dropped! and thank you for the tips on the new image that was helpful :) FarisLloyd (talk) 20:33, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * As long as your edits are in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, you should be fine; if they’re not, you’re likely to start having problems. The way you described your “connection” to Lloyd and her team in one of your Teahouse posts is a bit different than what you’re now posting here. Perhaps you embellished your connection a bit in that Teahouse post because you mistakenly thought it might make it easier to edit content about Lloyd? The more transparent you’re about any the connection you may have, the better it will be for you and the more likely it’s going to make other editors want to help you. Only you know the true nature of your connection (if there’s one) to Lloyd or her team; Wikipedia only knows what you tell it and it doesn’t have a team of investigators that go around checking on whether individual editors are who they claim to be. You’re ultimately going to be judged on the quality of your edits, and others will become concerned if you start to make questionable edits, particularly if all you do is edit or create content about Lloyd. Perhaps you should branch out a bit and starting editing other articles or doing other things that improve Wikipedia, but are unrelated to Lloyd. The more you show the Wikipedia community that you’re WP:HERE, the less likely the community is going to think you’re WP:NOTHERE. — Marchjuly (talk) 22:56, 28 September 2020 (UTC)


 * I sincerely apologize. I honestly did feel if I stated I had a connection I could get what I want easier. However I do speak to her marketing manager on Instagram but he never asked me to change her picture. I am so sorry for lying about it but I just really wish we could change her picture to something better. Again I apologize!FarisLloyd (talk) 23:41, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Signing' your posts
On Talk pages and at Teahouse, 'sign' you posts by typing four of ~ at the end. This enters your User name and time of posting. If you don't, an automated program will get around to adding the information, but in the interim, no one knows who made a posting, or when. David notMD (talk) 08:40, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

My apologiesFarisLloyd (talk) 20:30, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Joznez and other disruption
What was that all about? I see that your edits reveal no great experience or skill with encyclopedic writing, but that draft was really not good at all. And while we're on that topic, you've been asked about your conflict of interest in regard to Cher Lloyd, which appeared to be a case of wishful thinking--but at the same time your edits on One Drink Away (Cher Lloyd song) are far from neutral. Drmies (talk) 03:13, 11 March 2021 (UTC)


 * In regards to your comments on my conflict of interest, I have none. I am simply a very knowledgeable person on Cher Lloyd's career and would like to contribute to her Wikipedia? Is that too much to ask. And in terms of Joznez, I was trying to figure out how to link his german page to the English Wikipedia. Also in regards to your exclaims on my edits, the article is nowhere near done I am still editing it and also they are very neutral and provide no bias anywhere. If you think putting reviews on a song wiki is a problem that is a normal thing in all song wikis. Thank you. FarisLloyd (talk) 03:38, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Your comments above say otherwise. Please don't promote this artist and her singles. No, "putting reviews on a song wiki" is normal, but you didn't put "reviews" there--you simply dropped a few poor blurbs on it. That's promotional editing. Drmies (talk) 13:27, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I can see how the tweet on the one drink away-page could be promotional writing however the rest has been salvaged and placed accordingly in a way that is not promotional. Again I am fairly new to this and am trying my best. I ask that you bear with me and just give me tips and things to fix rather than just removing the hard work that I spent hours compiling for the wikis. I did not mean to get off on the wrong foot with you I just got a little angry that you reverted my edits! FarisLloyd (talk) 14:23, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:57, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:OneDrinkAwayCherLloydCover.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:OneDrinkAwayCherLloydCover.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) 17:57, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Stop using your Twitter account as a source
Your Twitter account with 133 followers is not a reliable source. You clearly know only official social media accounts can be used (as you said this in an edit summary the other day), and even then, only use social media sparingly per WP:TWITTER. You are not a reliable source even if you claim you "know" how to "calculate sales and streams", nor is any other fan account for Cher Lloyd, or a fan account of any other singer for that matter. You do not get to decide what song or album is certified, nor do you get to "update" a certification. Only the official organisations like Recorded Music NZ, the British Phonographic Industry and the Recording Industry Association of America get to decide that. Until they say something is certified, it is not certified. If you continue to add BS information and promote your own Cher Lloyd fan account, I will report you to an administrator and you will be blocked for adding this nonsense. Stop immediately.  Ss  112   16:46, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I'll second what Ss112 says above – even if the "DigitalLloydC" account is not yours, it is not in any way reliable and the "sales" figures it states are clearly ludicrous. 10 million sales for Sticks and Stones? That would easily make it one of the top-selling albums worldwide in the last 10 or 11 years. Ed Sheeran's ÷ only has certified sales of 7.4 million, and that topped the chart in 24 countries and has multi-platinum certifications... are we really supposed to believe that an album which spent only two weeks in the UK top 20 and one week in the top 30 of the Billboard 200, and which only has one gold certification from anywhere in the world, sold nearly 50% as much again as that album? Richard3120 (talk) 20:15, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

First of all, please cut out all of this aggression on my talk page, secondly, the sales for sticks and stones are for sure NOT 10 million that was not my intended text and I apologize for that. However, for DigitalLloydC, the account is not mine and I only added these sales numbers because of calculated sales from account @talkofthecharts on Twitter. This account makes mid-week numbers from official sources as well as chart statistics as the person who runs the account works in the industry. Before adding these sales I made sure to contact DigitalLloydC account to make use of the source they provided which they told me was Talk Of The Charts. That is why those sales are there. Also, that account is followed by the artist herself and has been for a couple of months which means she has seen these numbers. In terms of certifications, the NZ certified one is the only one not directly stated from Recorded Music NZ, HOWEVER if you know anything about that association you would know they do NOT have any database for archived certs. So I talked to DigitalLloydC again and they provided me with AMPLE proof of this certification citing even Cher's response to them when they asked her. Please do not report me for trying my best to provide information, I am still learning this site. FarisLloyd (talk)
 * Talk of the Charts won't be a reliable source either, though – they're just reporting certifications from elsewhere, and for that you can go directly to RIAA, BPI or other official certifying bodies. TOFC are not the official providers of sales figures, and any attempts to calculate them from figures supplied by official bodies aren't reliable. The fact that Cher Lloyd has seen the numbers on the Twitter account means nothing – it doesn't mean she agrees with them or confirms them, and let's face it, she's hardly likely to complain about anything which flatters her sales figures. You are wrong about Recorded Music NZ not having an archive of their certifications: if you go to their website and find a particular chart, you'll see a banner saying "Gold" or "Platinum" in the top left corner of each song/album if it has been certified. Here's the album chart for the second of the two weeks that Sticks and Stones was on the NZ album chart: unsurpisingly, with only two weeks on the chart, the album never received a certification, but you can see that many of the other albums in that week's chart had been certified. Richard3120 (talk) 23:38, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

I understand over talk of the charts, however the new zealand charts only show its cert WHILE it is charting, after many years with sales accumulating the song "I Wish" will have most definitely been certified through the calculations and through it still receiving NZ airplay today. Also in terms of None of my business the song is CONFIRMED certified in brazil because her team literally posted about it so please do not remove that certification and achievement! Thank you for your help and change of tone.FarisLloyd (talk)
 * "Change of tone"? I sent you the first message. sent you the second. We're two different editors. You have again used Twitter as a source on None of My Business. Once you've been reverted, per WP:BRD, you seek consensus for your changes by proposing them on the talk page. Cher Lloyd's team doesn't get to decide what is certified in Brazil—only Pro-Música Brasil can. If you reinstate using Twitter as a source anywhere on Wikipedia with your next few edits, you can answer to an administrator why you think Twitter pictures are reliable sources of information. Labels reporting sales and certifications have never been acceptable for use on Wikipedia.


 * Secondly, we do not use Video Streaming charts in the charts section for a song. That chart is for the music video specifically. Just because charts are official does not mean we should include them; see WP:INDISCRIMINATE—Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Don't you think it's rather telling how editors think of video streaming charts that they are not included on other articles? You don't see them included. So stop citing it.


 * Another thing: please learn the difference between the Ultratop 50, and the Ultratip charts of Belgium. You can clearly see on the ultratop.be page for "I Wish" that it says "Tip: 34". As you are apparently unaware, the Ultratip chart is essentially the "bubbling under" chart of Belgium, so it did not peak at 34 on the main top 50, it peaked at number 34 on the next 50 positions below the top 50. Finally, stop marking large re-additions of content as minor edits. Unless you've only changed a couple of bytes of information like correcting a typo, you are not making a minor edit. See Help:Minor edit. Also, maintain a maximum of 10 columns on discographies—this has been the limit since editors started using WP:DISCOGSTYLE as a guide.  Ss  112   12:31, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to M.I.A (Cher Lloyd song). Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you.  Ss  112   00:29, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Oh, my apologies! I did not know the difference between the charts haha. Also in terms of the video streaming chart, I added I did not realize this was not an official chart? It is on the Official chart company site but I guess it is not a main chart :). Again I am still learning, so I'd appreciate it if you gave me more tips and information to help me navigate avoiding wasting time on edits that will get reverted! Appreciate it FarisLloyd (talk)

Final warning
Hello, I'm Serge, an Admin here on Wikipedia. I'm seeing a lot of complaints about your handling of articles related Cher Lloyd. They're coming from a lot of experienced editors, and they're making good points. So we've really got to get some changes going here. If you don't start turning things around, your account may end up getting blocked. Some required changes include:
 * 1) Use official figures and sources for sales. Full stop. No social media or obscure bloggers. Things like sales should come straight from the official charting sources like Billboard, RIAA, ARIA, etc.
 * 2) Youve acknowledged you've got, albeit weak, connections to the subject, such as being a member of the street team, and knowing her manager. The problem is, your contributions blatantly reflect that. Wikipedia is not a fan site. If you want to write nothing but gushing, glowingly positive content about her, go make a Twitter fan account or something. If you are to be writing about her, you need to write far more neutrally, in a professional, detached sort of way.
 * 3) Start using more reliable sources in your edits. It's not appropriate to be writing reception sections from press releases or social media. Please see WP:RSMUSIC and WP:NOTRSMUSIC for guidance until you have a better understanding about what reliable, third party sourcing looks like - which is the type of sourcing you should be using.

Let me know if you have any questions, but you won't be arguing your way out of things like you have with countless others. Change, or risk getting your account blocked. Thanks. Sergecross73  msg me  13:39, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * It appears you've chosen to ignore this, so you're blocked 31 hours. Sergecross73   msg me  00:38, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Umm, I'm not too sure what your problem is. Firstly I am taking into account the information that these editors have been messaging, also I did not "ignore" your post if you think that just because I don't respond in whatever time limit you thought I had is a reason for blocking, that is very unfair. Also, I corrected myself over my connections if you took the time to read my posts. And I am not treating Wikipedia like a fan site I just have a problem with you experienced editors coming with a vile tone when addressing things. Again if you read ANY of my posts you would know I am fairly new to Wikipedia and am still learning the ropes so if I make a few mistakes it is not that big of a deal. Also, the sales were literally removed and I did not add anything back so I'm not sure why that is in your posts. And my edits are neutral so again, very confused as to your point for sending me this message and proceeding to block me. If there is any problem with my edits please just message me but I have a hard time replying to comments and messages that do nothing but question my abilities as an editor. Thank you. FarisLloyd (talk)
 * You added a source that absolutely did not verify the chart position you meant to verify, right after I gave you a final warning about sourcing. Sergecross73   msg me  01:25, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Sourcing and notability guidelines
This is a slightly different, but related to, point #3 of my warning above. You need to stop relying so heavily on first party sourcing from social media. You recently created Brazil (Iggy Azalea song) with only one third party source - HotNew HipHop. The rest are all YouTube and Instagram and things directly from the artist.


 * Please see the WP:GNG. This is the most generic rule on whether or not something should have its own article. WP:NSONGS is another. You should learn these - the article in its current shape fails both.


 * Also read WP:PRIMARY. First party sources can be used sparingly for very basic facts. But it should not be used to source the majority of the article like you have. Like I said above, see WP:RSMUSIC for the type of sources we aim to use.

If you have questions, let me know. Sergecross73  msg me  13:53, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:BaddestCherLloydImanbekCover.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:BaddestCherLloydImanbekCover.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) 17:09, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

June 2021
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Sun Goes Down (Lil Nas X song), without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.  Ss  112   20:35, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

"One Drink Away"
Faris, you continue to miss the point about notability. Cher promoting the song on her Instagram is not independent notability. Cher giving an interview saying what the song is about is not independent notability. A press release from her record company is not independent notability. A link to the personal website of the man who directed the video is not independent notability. The opening question of an interview with her (the EDM Tunes source, which you have incorrectly framed as "critical reception") is not independent. Literally the only thing that is usable as an independent source is one sentence from a non-notable online radio station. That's why this article doesn't pass the notability criteria, and it's not essential that every Cher Lloyd song must have a Wikipedia article if there are no independent reliable sources about it. Richard3120 (talk) 22:34, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Blocked
I just gave you multiple warnings/instructions on sourcing, and I've seen that since then, you've repeatedly restored poorly sourced articles without any improvement. I don't get the vibe that you're taking the time to learn things. You're blocked for 1 week. Please take the time to learn more about our notability and sourcing guidelines. Sergecross73  msg me  17:56, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:OneDrinkAwayCherLloydCover.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:OneDrinkAwayCherLloydCover.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) 17:41, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:IggyAzaleaBrazilArtwork.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:IggyAzaleaBrazilArtwork.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) 17:25, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Blocked
You are blocked again, this time for  1 month, due to your decision to yet again restore a poorly sourced Cher Lloyd article without any sourcing improvements. It violates a number of the final warnings you received earlier in the year. Sergecross73  msg me  19:06, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Don't add unsourced genres to articles
Creating articles with unsourced genres on them is not a good look for you after your three very recent blocks for similar problems on Cher Lloyd articles. I think you should be very careful lest you be blocked again, and make sure everything on articles you create is sourced.  Ss  112   00:40, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Redrum (Sorana and David Guetta song) moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Redrum (Sorana and David Guetta song), is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 00:01, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:48, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

June 2023: Do not add unsourced chart positions
Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Cardi B discography, you may be blocked from editing.  Ss  112   21:33, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi Serge. This user, whom you last blocked in 2021 for disruptive editing and having sourcing issues with their edits, is currently on a spree of adding unsourced chart positions to articles., , are just three examples from the over a dozen in the last half-hour.  Ss   112   21:31, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
 * What? All of my chart positions come from @chartdata on twitter which are a verified acc that posted data. None of the other positions are sourced so why do I have to source mine individually? FarisLloyd (talk) 21:35, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Their twitter account is here and has over 2.2M followers. They also have a website which shows the multiple blogs etc that have cited them. They are reliable. https://twitter.com/chartdata https://chartdata.org/ FarisLloyd (talk) 21:39, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
 * First of all, you didn't provide any source when adding any of the chart positions to the articles you just edited. Secondly, all the other chart positions are sourced by the header citations, so yes they are absolutely all sourced. If you knew what you were talking about, you would know that. Thirdly, it does not matter how many Twitter followers an account has—do you think the more followers somebody has the more reliable it makes a source? Followers can be bought, they can be bots. Don't use unofficial Twitter accounts as a source per WP:TWITTER. If anything, you should use @billboardcharts, which is the official Billboard charts account. You are a user who has habitually added unsourced content in the past—that is undeniable. You've just made over a dozen more edits without providing a source for any of them so it's not a good look.  Ss  112   21:57, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I also showed you the .org website to further provide info on how this page is reliable. FarisLloyd (talk) 21:59, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Do better. chartdata.org is listed at WP:BADCHARTSAVOID. So you're just using a bad chart website's Twitter account. You are again ignoring the fact that you didn't provide any source when you made the edits. If you don't know which sources to use, or which are reliable, don't add chart positions. Or any information.  Ss  112   22:01, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Please cite the charts directly, and actually cite the sources you use. (In the examples above you didn't cite anything. See WP:REFB if you don't understand how to cite sources. There is zero reason to be citing "chart data.org" directly - they do not come up with any chart info themselves. Sergecross73   msg me  22:03, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:00, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

February 2024
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Palestinians, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 14:52, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics
Selfstudier (talk) 11:07, 27 February 2024 (UTC)