User talk:GustavoCza/Archive 1

Orphaned non-free image File:Coldplay shot by Ellie Pritts 01.png
Thanks for uploading File:Coldplay shot by Ellie Pritts 01.png. 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, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Coldplay shot by Marcus Haney 02.png
Thanks for uploading File:Coldplay shot by Marcus Haney 02.png. 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, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Additions of certifications to Coldplay discography
Hello. Regarding your additions of significant amounts of certification data to Coldplay discography, it is generally accepted that certifications should only be listed on discographies/in discography sections that pertain to countries with chart columns in those sections. Stuffing the page with most, or even the "top 10 most significant" certifications the artist's releases have achieved is excessive and WP:INDISCRIMINATE amounts of information for a discography's scope. Discographies are not supposed to list every chart or certification, or even indicate every chart or certification an artist's releases have achieved. These are saved for the main articles for those individual topics. It is also inappropriate to bold a link to the single or album article so readers can find more certifications. It would be expected that if a reader wanted to see more information on that release, including if it has been certified in a certain country, they would click on its main entry. Please do not continue with or reinstate the massive amounts of certification information you have brought to the page in the past two weeks, as it has been removed per WP:BRD. Please exercise some restraint going forwards. Thanks.  Ss  112   11:04, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Coldplay discography
Hi. Please don't italicise the titles of singles, even if they are in the album column. Even if there is obviously some insistence on putting the singles these B-sides are from in the album column, we should still put the single in quotation marks and be specifying that they are singles by stating "single" next to them (so less-informed readers do not confuse them for unitalicised album titles). Writing Violet Hill (B-Side)  in the album column makes no sense, because we're essentially treating the album column as the single's parent release column.  Ss  112   02:31, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

File:Coldplay shot by Marcus Haney 01.png listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Coldplay shot by Marcus Haney 01.png, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. (CC) Tb hotch ™ 21:18, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Coldplay shot by Marcus Haney 01.png
Thanks for uploading File:Coldplay shot by Marcus Haney 01.png. 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) 03:28, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Mat Whitecross in 2011.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Mat Whitecross in 2011.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) 03:43, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Celebritynetworth.com as a source
Hi GustavoCza. I noticed that you recently used celebritynetworth.com as a source for biographical information in Phil Harvey (manager). Please note that the general consensus as expressed at WP:RSN is that it does not meet the reliable sourcing criteria for the inclusion of personal information in such articles. I've gone ahead and removed it. If you disagree, let's discuss it. You may want to check WP:RSP and WP:RSN to help determine if a source is reliable. Thanks.--Hipal (talk) 19:23, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Mat Whitecross.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Mat Whitecross.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text  below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 03:29, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Your Revert On My Edit
Hey! I saw that you reverted my edit on the article Coldplay discography and I just wanted to explain to you why I did what I did. First of all, whenever you're reverting an edit of a user — or even users — you need to give a reason why you're doing so. Now, I know that I didn't give a reason why I deleted the source "chartdata.org", but I am here to do so. So, according to WP:CHARTS, chartdata.org reproduces "some data available from Recommended charts. Other available chart information is of unsystematic or uncertain origin." So, I've been going through articles that have "chartdata.org" as a reference(s) and delete them. If you have any problem with that, please ping me here or create a new section on my user talk page. Good day/night! (P.S. If you do not respond back to me in the next 24 hours, I will revert back to my version.) Jack Reynolds (talk to me!) (email me!!) 13:29, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Phil Harvey.jpg


A tag has been placed on File:Phil Harvey.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use it — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Whpq (talk) 13:42, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for contributions
You're welcome! GustavoCza (talk) 02:56, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Higher Power
Hi GustavoCza, Thank you for adding a source to the Higher Power (Coldplay song) article in such a short time, I appreciate the effort!

Happy editing, TheFrog001 - Talk to me! 23:18, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Coldplay discography
Hi. Just a note about your recent edits on Coldplay discography. There is no need to move citations placed in the table into the header citations when they're only intended to be there temporarily. I'm sure you can handle having two citations placed directly below the chart peaks on an article you're interested in for a few days until the citations in the column headers update. Also, "the peak is sourced on the song page" is not a thing. While editors will occasionally remove sources sourcing tracks as singles when they have an article made on them, the same is not done for chart positions at all. The chart peaks should be sourced on each page they are placed on per WP:V. There is no need to change things like this each time somebody adds them to an article you watch. Thank you.  Ss  112   01:45, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Also, in response to this, no discography wikitable needs to have 10 charts. I think you're mistaking the fact that we can have 10 charts maximum in a table for a minimum requirement. There is no requirement to have a set number of columns in any way.  Ss  112   01:48, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Don't change singles to promotional singles without a discussion
Again, in relation to your edits to Coldplay's discography: you need to be starting discussions with regards to what are commercial singles and what are promotional singles. You should not be reclassifying songs that have been referred to on Coldplay's individual album articles for years as having full commercial releases as "promotional singles" just for one article. I advise you to open discussions on Talk:Ghost Stories (Coldplay album) and Talk:Everyday Life (Coldplay album) as to the status of "Midnight", "Ink", "Everyday Life" and "Champion of the World" as singles before you move them again. Otherwise this constitutes WP:OR, is blatantly inconsistent and looks like you've acted based on your own whims or fan theories. Please make some effort to expand your edits beyond just Coldplay discography and more importantly, involve other editors in the process. Thanks.  Ss  112   02:12, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Phil Harvey (2021).png
Thanks for uploading File:Phil Harvey (2021).png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 13:28, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * You provided this link as evidence of permission. There are multiple issues with this.  The biggest is that there is no statement of public domain.  There must be an explicit license statement.  The second is that it is just a screenshot.  We cannot tell from a screenshot that you are getting permission from the copyright holder.  The message above provides you with information about how to properly have the license and permission confirmed. -- Whpq (talk) 13:33, 25 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I'll ask Hayley to send the email you're asking for, will that be enough or should I do anything more? GustavoCza (talk) 13:43, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * It's very important that there be an explicit license in the permission email. You've tagged the image as permission pending through OTRS so that is it for now.  Thanks for taking care of this. -- Whpq (talk) 13:56, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * It will be written exactly as requested in the sample. That should be good right? GustavoCza (talk) 14:02, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, that should be okay. -- Whpq (talk) 15:25, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

External links to social media
Please stop adding twitter links to External links sections in articles. You can see the guidelines for appropriate (and inappropriate) external links at WP:EL. Schazjmd  (talk)  22:19, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Regarding your recently created article
Hey. I recently replaced your article Music of the Spheres with a redirect to Coldplay's discography. The album currently does not meet the criteria for notability at WP:GNG or WP:FUTUREALBUM, as nothing of note has been written about it. If you disagree with this decision, you can recreate the article with reliable sources supporting its notability. PopLizard86427 (talk) 16:00, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Music of the Spheres (2021).jpeg
Thanks for uploading File:Music of the Spheres (2021).jpeg. 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. PopLizard86427 (talk) 06:34, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Re
Hi! Re this edit, the chronology very clearly states "Coldplay singles chronology", so I don't understand why we would include a promotional single, which is very different from a single, in that chronology. Lastly, Coldplayxtra is an unreliable source, and I wasn't exactly concerned with replacing the source, but I was more concerned on removing the unreliable one. So, if you could please find a reliable source ASAP that backs up that information, that would be great. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 21:59, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

All of their promotional singles are included in the chronology. I can separate them into two different chronologies if you want, but since that will take a lot of time, leave things how they are for a bit. GustavoCza (talk) 22:05, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I would appreciate it if you did that. Alternatively, I wouldn't be opposed to doing that. Another option could be to bring this up at WP:COLDPLAY and see if anyone there is willing to do it there. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 22:07, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I'll check it out with them, thanks. GustavoCza (talk) 22:15, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Awesome! If you could please ping me when you start that discussion, that would be great. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 22:17, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Sure, not now though, I'm about to go into a classroom reunion, bye! GustavoCza (talk) 22:19, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * That's fine, I wasn't expecting you to do that right away. Have fun! D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 22:20, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * It's college and in long-distance, it won't be fun :') But thanks! GustavoCza (talk) 22:23, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Coldplay, Band Members
Hi GustavoCza! I reverted your last edit to the Members section of the Coldplay article. You had exchanged Jonny and Guy so that the order was Chris-Guy-Jonny-Will-Phil. However, band members are usually listed according to the order in which they joined the band, or, in case of multiple members being the band's founders, in alphabetical order. In our case Chris and Jonny where the two that founded Coldplay, so they should be at the top according to the convention. However if you had good reasons for your edits, please feel free to revert mine to your last version! FilBenLeafBoy (Let's Talk!) 17:00, 19 August 2021 (UTC)


 * I was just fixing a few little details. No reason for the order change though, I didn't knew there were rules behind it. -GustavoCza (talk) 15:11, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

September 2021
Hello. I have noticed that you edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! Muhandes (talk) 09:55, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Ok -GustavoCza (talk) 18:36, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

October 2021
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Coldplay discography, 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.  Ss  112   02:48, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Are you going to remove the sources that prove the chart positions from directly below them every single time Coldplay has a new song out? By removing these sources you are leaving them unverified and I see no other reason you're doing it other than the aesthetics of the page. So stop. Next step is reporting you to an administrator.  Ss  112   03:01, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

ok ok got it, no need to harass me GustavoCza (talk) 06:16, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

October 2021
Hello, I'm Οἶδα. I noticed that you recently removed content from Music of the Spheres (Coldplay album) without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Οἶδα (talk) 02:01, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

I was going to add two different ones that are more notable but forgot about it GustavoCza (talk) 02:05, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * As far as I understand, there currently are no "more notable" reviews that have been published. Especially any more notable than from two of the most notable British newspapers in existence, The Times and the Financial Times. Feel free to make your case though. Οἶδα (talk) 03:27, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Pilar Zeta (2018-2019).jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Pilar Zeta (2018-2019).jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text  below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 01:28, 9 December 2021 (UTC)


 * The copyright holder will be will be releasing this media under a free license, thank you --GustavoCza (talk) 01:31, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Until that happens, this image is non-free content and cannot be used because it does not meet the nonfree content criteria. Whpq (talk) 01:34, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Sure --GustavoCza (talk) 01:39, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Pilar Zeta (2018-2019).jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Pilar Zeta (2018-2019).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) 18:30, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I uploaded it incorrectly, please just delete the file already, thanks! --GustavoCza (talk) 18:38, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

File:Coldplay&#39;s 2021 Christmas Message.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Coldplay&, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 00:36, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Coldplay&#39;s 2021 Christmas Message.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Coldplay&. 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) 03:24, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Your revert on My Universe
MPAs are not an actual award (despite being so named) and should never be included in awards+noms tables, nor should they be attached to the table as you did because the table caption/columns don't apply to them either. My removal from the table was correct and your revert was unnecessary. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 05:57, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Akane Yamaguchi
Hello. Help improvements. Thanks you. Awibz (talk) 06:55, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Coldplay, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Target. 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) 06:00, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Table captions are required, even where considered redundant
Hi. Even though you added the table caption to the year-end chart table on the article for Music of the Spheres, you later removed it. Table captions are required per MOS:TABLECAPTION, even if they repeat information in the section heading. Please do not remove them. Thank you.  Ss  112   16:48, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

January 2022
If you want to make test edits, please use the Sandbox and don't play games in our articles, as you did at Olavo de Carvalho. Bishonen &#124; tålk 16:02, 25 January 2022 (UTC).
 * As a Brazilian I just wanted to celebrate that awful man's d wording. No worries. GustavoCza (talk) 16:04, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Edit to Associação Fonográfica Portuguesa
Hi GustavoCza, I'm reaching out to you regarding this edit (and many edits to single articles). I ask that you discuss this change at Template talk:Certification Table Entry. The suggestion of using M&M thresholds was discussed in the past (e.g. Template talk:Certification Table Entry/Archive 10) and we usually agree not to use them. The reason is that we know the thresholds for the two years that M&M published their yearly summaries, but we don't know how long they stood afterwards. You claim the single thresholds were held until May 2005, but I don't see a source. In addition, if you discuss it and we reach consensus, we will program these numbers into certification Table Entry and it will be done automatically. There is no need to edit articles one by one, especially since all you do is flood. I suggest you revert these edits and hold these changes until this subject is cleared up. --Muhandes (talk) 19:50, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Coldplay - Flags
Hi GustavoCza, I completely understand why you believe "Flags" is not a promo single so just wanted to quickly chat outside of the edit pages. The press release from Coldplay when the song dropped certainly implied that "Flags" wasn't a single. However, even outside of the digital releases, physical promotional singles were sent to radio stations by Warner and there are photos of these physical CDs (exp. https://www.picclickimg.com/images/g/BtUAAOSwWrxgfYkW/s-l1600.jpg). Again, I understand exactly where you're coming from since this was only lightly publicized, but I just want to make sure we're keeping the most accurate information. Please let me know if you still disagree. Thanks! Happyomen (talk) 03:41, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Places
You're mostly editing things to do with Coldplay. You aren't right on some things. One is the word top is often used as an adj.Justanother2 (talk) 16:58, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Do you mind trying to listen? "Reinforce" is wrong. You are incorrect.Justanother2 (talk) 18:04, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * As a general rule things are correct or incorrect. Not a mixture of both.Justanother2 (talk) 18:06, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * If you won't answer here would you reply on the talk page for the band? I suppose we could list each edit with which you don't agree. Also other editors on here have asked you questions before and you seem to not pay much attention to what they are asking about.Justanother2 (talk) 11:58, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * A lot of your edits are just changing the wording up to your liking, not real contributions. I had a back-and-forth with a U2 fan over pictures once but we never really argued on the text because they always helped to make things more concise and professional-looking. Except for the history section everything on Coldplay's main article has been revised multiple times by recurring editors, if you're feeling like improving stuff, feel free do edit there, the rest has been taken care of already. --GustavoCza (talk) 13:34, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Also, stop with the weird abbreviations no one understands. --GustavoCza (talk) 13:35, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Have been explaining you are not editing correctlyJustanother2 (talk) 19:38, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I single-handedly made Coldplay's awards page featured, my editing is just fine. --GustavoCza (talk) 19:40, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Having some or even quite a bit of skill with research doesn't mean you know how to edit well. Look at how other wiki band pages describe the line-up. Find me one with the word consist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justanother2 (talk • contribs) 20:51, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * U2 (featured), Radiohead (featured), Led Zeppelin (good), Fall Out Boy (good) and many others. --GustavoCza (talk) 20:57, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * For Radiohead it incorrectly says consists which is not consist.Justanother2 (talk) 21:06, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Recurring editors is also not right. Repeat edits would be.Justanother2 (talk) 21:59, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Making one awards page or even more than a few while interesting is not that unusual.Justanother2 (talk) 22:01, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * What? Look, you're not even making any sense right now, just leave Coldplay articles alone, you're not contributing to them. --GustavoCza (talk) 22:02, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * You are being strange. Now people have to find new information on a band? Who the heck are you?Justanother2 (talk) 22:04, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * If you want new information about the band you can just read the article? As I mentioned everything except for the history section is already well elaborated and up to date. In fact, most of the new informations were things that I have written lol, they didn't even had an Achievements/Impact section before. --GustavoCza (talk) 22:06, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

TMR
Why would two vinyl pressings be too little of a thing to be included? Third Man Records is not a small label.Justanother2 (talk) 23:38, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * They are not signed to that label. Imagine if we were to include every single company that has ever worked with them.--GustavoCza (talk) 23:40, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Harassment
Hey, there is a discussion on WP:ANI about the same user who reverts your edits on Coldplay articles where another user has a similar situation as yours with another article, not relating to Coldplay though. I felt it was right for me to point out the edit warring problem involving you on there since the section was already started today. I would not want to be involved in that edit warring problem to any of those articles relating to Coldplay myself. Cheers, Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 19:04, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't really wanna go there right now because I'm about go offline, but this user in question keeps deleting everything I write on the leads for Guy Berryman, Jonny Buckland and Will Champion. I know there's guidelines and all but a six line lead compared to the original 12 line one? Come on. Isn't the lead supposed to be a summary of the article? Why can't I just include where each member studied and then add something about their artistry since they're musicians? This user is simply not willing to contribute to the article. Just delete, delete and delete. That's all I have to say as of today. Thank you for informing me. --GustavoCza (talk) 19:12, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I can see that the block log shows the user was blocked once for edit warring earlier this year, so obviously not taken into account that edit warring is a serious Wikipedia violation. I agree the lead is the summary of the article and the user keeps deleting valid content so the user could be on it's way to another block if an administrator agrees to do so. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 19:22, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Here's and . Would you mind giving me any notes on them? Either way I can see why some information can not be considered notable enough, so I tried to reach consensus with a smaller lead  and . The same happened to a different extent with Berryman's article, but I did not minded what happened there that much because I have yet to revamp his page. Will and Jonny's ones were completely new. --GustavoCza (talk) 19:31, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't see any issues with what "the original lead" with any of them as long as that gets included below with at least one reference. I only just noticed your response, hence the two day wait, by the time I've finally noticed that, I see the talk page of Will Champion gets a discussion with you and the other editor. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 19:47, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I tried to reshape the lead again based on featured articles since they're high quality and the user insists in having everything on his way. Bear in mind the original lead was not changed for an entire month, which can pretty much be considered a consensus. GustavoCza (talk) 19:51, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I have reported Unbh to the Edit warring noticeboard since I've noticed Jonny Buckland has been the subject of 3RR once again. That needs to stop as soon as possible. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 14:05, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

I tried to talk to this user multiple times and they refused to reach consensus by ignoring me. We kind of reached a consensus on Will Champion's page but that was after I tried to restore the old leads. This user basically only responds when someone tried to take action by adding further information about each artist on the lead. GustavoCza (talk) 14:49, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
 * We have discussed extensively, but there's been no agreement, until I think today at least where we both seem happy with the point they are today. I'm not sure why Iggy feels the need to canvas here.
 * If we leave Jonny's first paragraph like this version (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jonny_Buckland&direction=prev&oldid=1080426297) it becomes similar to Will's page, bringing a standardization to Coldplay members pages and finally a consensus. If you accept we won't be stressing each other anymore. Not until I go back to edit Guy Berryman's page anyway, I only revamped his early years section, there's still a lot of work to do. --GustavoCza (talk) 15:08, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

April 2022
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Guy Berryman, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Unbh (talk) 04:37, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I really don't think that is needed in either article, but if it must go in I suppose it's ok.

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 21:32, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Edit warring at Jonny Buckland and Will Champion
Hello GustavoCza. You've been warned per a complaint at the edit warring noticeboard. You may be blocked if you revert either of these articles again in the next month without first getting a consensus in your favor on the article talk page. EdJohnston (talk) 17:48, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry :(
 * Will the warn be lifted in 6 May 2022 then? It's just a genuine doubt. Me and the other user have pretty much reached a consensus by now.
 * -- GustavoCza (talk) 17:52, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
 * If you believe there is a consensus, please state on the article talk page what you think it is. Both of you were reverting as recently as April 4 at Jonny Buckland about the delay pedal. Does User:Unbh now agree that the words 'delay pedal' should be included? EdJohnston (talk) 18:04, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
 * They removed the delay pedal for believing that it was not stated in the article. I then explained to them that BOSS RV-3 is a delay pedal. They removed again for believing the information was not sourced. I then explained there was a source, I just didn't repeated its use after the delay pedal phrase. So I edited the page to repeat it and included it back on the lead. The same kind of goes to Will's article. We discussed a bit over the wording of his style on the lead but now it's pretty much in-line with the sourced information in the body so I don't think we will have any problems. There isn't exactly any animosity anymore.
 * -- GustavoCza (talk) 18:12, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
 * To be honest I don't think it should be in there, but there's a fundamental difference between what I think should go in the lede and what Gustavo does, and as one point in a wider discussion I think we've reached some sort of compromise on this is less important, and better sourced than other things we've now removed or written differently. I'm not going to die on the delay pedal hill.Unbh (talk) 18:20, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Will Champion Violin 2009.png
Thanks for uploading File:Will Champion Violin 2009.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text  below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:08, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Just delete this already then. I give up. I tried to make the articles for my favorite artists nice but y'all hate everything I do. GustavoCza (talk) 03:14, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Jonny Buckland Jordan 2019.png
Thanks for uploading File:Jonny Buckland Jordan 2019.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text  below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:16, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Mat Whitecross (2018).png
Thanks for uploading File:Mat Whitecross (2018).png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text  below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:18, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Unreleased songs by Coldplay
Hi Gustavo! I decided to restore the "unreleased songs" list on the page List of songs recorded by Coldplay, which had been dramatically reduced last March. Given the size of the edit, I decided to write to you to discuss the issue. I know that some of the songs were not well sourced, but I searched a lot on the internet last summer and I managed to verify some 80% of the entries (maybe more), most of which had been deleted in March. If you think some song is not well sourced, please let me know and I will try my best to provide you with a reliable source. In this period I don't have much time to update the list myself, but I know where to look for the sources if needed. Thanks for reading my message and sorry for undoing your edit. All the best from a fellow Coldplayer! FilBenLeafBoy (Let's Talk!) 17:21, 9 may 2022 (UTC).
 * I don't want to sound mean but your list looks a bit messy. If you could put the songs under the new format (which displays the source in a separated column) it would be wonderful. The descriptions should be shorter as well, and the sources from the songs that remained were all cleaned up, so you should have kept those before restoring the old list. Keep in mind that the List of songs recorded by Coldplay has been promoted just a few years ago, so we need to keep everything as tidy as possible. Other than that, I've been revamping the band's individual pages. After I finish Guy and Chris, I plan to revamp the History section of their main article and nominate it for Featured. Once it's promoted, I want to nominate a Coldplay Topic for Featured, which will have their main article, discography, awards and list of songs. The latter's high quality is essencial for me to succeed in my final goal. --GustavoCza (talk) 15:42, 9 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi, ok I understand that the quality of the list is way worse than it was before, but it's better to keep the information and improve it, than deleting everything altogether. Moreover, I'm not the author of the list, I just improved the descriptions and provided some sources. If you think the list is damaging the article's quality, we can hide it into comment marks and we can progressively "extract" pieces from it to create a good-looking table, similarly to what we have done with the Coldplay main page. Is it a good idea for you? As I said, I would really like to tidy the list myself, but at present I'm quite busy and I don't have enough time to do it properly. Anyway, I just added some new sources that I have found today. As soon as I have time, I can add others. Please let me know what's best in your opinion. FilBenLeafBoy (Let's Talk!) 18:51, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Just tidy up the list as soon as you can, no worries. I'm currently very busy as well. -- GustavoCza (talk) 16:53, 9 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Ok, I'll do my best when I'm free. Regarding the table, what makes it look messy, is the description section. Which I think is essential to understand how the song was crafted and what we know about it, so it can't be easily simplified. The only alternative might be that of inserting notes (like [a], [b] etc.), in a reference column with the description and the relative sources. This might also help to reduce the amount of repetitive text as songs which appeared on the same source (for instance the whiteboard in a documentary or the Game of Thrones musical) would display the same note. Is it a further complication or do you think it might help cleaning the page a bit? FilBenLeafBoy (Let's Talk!) 22:58, 9 May 2022 (UTC) FilBenLeafBoy (talk) 20:58, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Putting the descriptions in notes will be quite useful, perhaps we should make a separated column for that?
 * I don't know... We can work out the details later. Good idea! -- GustavoCza (talk) 21:03, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Coldplay lead section
Hey there – just wanted to reach out in case you wanted to discuss any little edits at the Coldplay article aside from the nationality part (keeping that discussion at the talk page). I don't want you to feel like I'm trying to have a crack at you/talk down your edits; that being said, my ownership point still stands, as I just feel based on some of your edits/summaries ("jesus, calm down beyoncé" certainly wasn't warranted) that you like to control the content, at least to an extent. There's absolutely nothing wrong with being passionate about a particular topic; just remember that others can edit the article as well, and sometimes having a little cool-off and coming back to a piece of content with fresh eyes can be better than continuing to double down on something. Anyway, just thought it might be worth having a civil discussion in case there was anything you felt strongly about. A couple of things that I will clarify – given you asked – is that I've seen "number one" and "no. 1" used intermittently at different articles, and in my "less is more (sometimes)" approach I thought I'd shorten it, but that's not something I'm particularly strong on; similarly, I thought I'd see how the contents table looked when compact (you can't actually view it in the edit preview), but again, not particularly strong on that one, so happy to leave those things for the time being. 4TheWynne  (talk  •  contribs)  15:49, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, I particularly have not seen "no. 1" being used in music-related articles. And I usually check for Taylor Swift, BTS, Beyoncé and other articles that I know are updated frequently and, as such, will likely be following current guidelines. The compact table is simply not practical for whoever access the page, each section have segments inside them after all. As for that second paragraph, it still needs work, I wanted to leave it alone while I was working on other stuff before coming back to it. Lastly, would you mind if we shorten the infobox picture's caption to "Coldplay at the Broadcasting House in 2021"? The current one looks good on Awards and Discography, but creates an unecessary additional line at Songs and Videography (which was why I first removed "the"). GustavoCza (talk) 17:56, 1 July 2022 (UTC)