User talk:HumanxAnthro/Archive 3

Zobbel
I apologize if I appear to be hounding your recent contributions, but do not cite Zobbel. Although Record charts does not list this site as a website to avoid, recent discussions in the past have provided enough consensus to determine that Zobbel is not a reliable source. ResPM (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 13:30, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Wait, they recently just considered that website unreliable? Wow, do times change on Wikipedia. Sorry about that. 👨x🐱 ( Nina Cortex x Coco Bandicoot ) 19:29, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Adding more than 10 charts and citing low peaks
Hi. Just because Zedd is German-Russian does not mean his discography requires a Russian chart column, especially when you added one when the discography already has 10 charts where Zedd performed better listed. While not a binding policy, editors follow WP:DISCOGSTYLE in maintaining 10 chart columns on discographies across the site, and forcing more than 10 columns into a discography table overstuffs an already information-heavy list and can be an MOS:ACCESS problem as on some devices, the text has to become minuscule in order to fit. Furthermore, listing peak positions lower than 200 was recently decided against by consensus per WP:Record charts. As an aside, as I also mentioned in my edit summary, Tophit tracks Russian airplay. All the other charts listed are based in actual, tangible sales and streams—active listening, as compared to counting the number of plays decided by Russian pop music DJs, which is passive listening. Thanks.  Ss  112   20:40, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
 * "Just because Zedd is German-Russian does not mean his discography requires a Russian chart column". How about this, ? How about you remove another non-Russian chart so that the list is at 10 columns? We always have the chart of the nationality of the artist listed first when available. Also, only five songs out of the 12 charted on the Tophit chart peaked under 200 on the chart below Russia, meaning seven songs were above 200 and thus WP:Record charts does not apply to them. Also, the Tophit chart counts Youtube streams in its methodology, not just radio hits, and I do not imagine people listening to stuff on Youtube passively listen. 👨x🐱 ( Nina Cortex x Coco Bandicoot ) 23:24, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
 * How about you remove another non-Russian chart so that the list is at 10 columns? Because you're the one interested in adding it, and I don't think it's a worthwhile chart—especially not to replace any of the others present, most of which are all bigger music markets compared to Russia, which wasn't even in the top 20 of the world's biggest music markets by annual revenue in 2017. Tophit is still airplay-based and is known for being so. There is also no such requirement (which I raise as you said "always") that a chart from the artist's birth place be present whatsoever—where did you even get this from? Besides, Zedd was only born in the Soviet Union. He was raised in Germany. I don't think somebody's birthplace is all that significant if they weren't raised there, don't live there, and especially when he doesn't even consider himself Russian. All that weighs more heavily against including it than...what? "He was born there so we must have a column for him"?  Ss  112   00:06, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Also, on a less serious note, I just clicked through to your contributions and saw that you added a year-end charts section on a song article when there wasn't a subheading for the weekly charts present. I understand it may not be a concern of yours and you may not see it as your responsibility, but can you add a matching weekly charts subheading for the other charts present when you do this? Thanks.  Ss  112   00:11, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * "There is also no such requirement (which I raise as you said "always") that a chart from the artist's birth place be present whatsoever—where did you even get this from?" All other artist discographies that have a national chart for their place of birth, that's what. None of this is out of personal interest. Whether a national music market wasn't specifically in the top 20 of a random year is arbitrary, as a country's annual revenue doesn't stay still forever. Not to mention that the country has appeared in the top 20 as late as 2010, and the IFPI has not published a top 20 list of countries since 2018, which mean its possible it could still be in the top 20 but in the 20–11 range. But even if Russia was not in the top 20 of a biggest-music markets list specifically, so what? That does not mean it's a small music market or is not close to the top 20. There's 195 countries, and whether a nation technically has a bigger music market means nothing on its own. Also, whether Zedd thinks of himself as not Russian means nothing too. Celebrities, especially those with the wealth Zedd has, are generally dumb people. He was born in the Russian part of the USSR, he's Russian-German. 👨x🐱 ( Nina Cortex x Coco Bandicoot ) 00:21, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Because typically, when there have been disputes on the matter before, we have gone by the size of the music market and the number of peaks listed (at least, those have been the arguments raised). I'm not sure if it was ever listed in a guideline or just a general principle, but the selected charts listed on a discography should be the most representative of an artist's international success, and I don't think Russia represents that with mostly low peaks (with only five entries in its top 100, every other chart listed Zedd performed far better on). Russia has only seven valid peaks. Counting notes (denoting appearances on a nation's other official charts), every other chart listed at present on the article has just as many or more appearances than the valid Russian chart positions or are indisputably bigger music markets (like the US) that we shouldn't replace. And with the last part of your message—do you consider Zedd so stupid as to render his personal assessment of his own national identity invalid? I don't think he was disputing that he was technically born in present-day Russia—he's talking about his identity, like how some Australians don't consider themselves English or British just because they born in England. If his birthplace doesn't matter to him, I don't know why it does to you.  Ss  112   00:31, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Anyway, I just wanted to say, I don't see a point in continuing to argue about this. If you consider the guy stupid, it just seems like we're arguing not because it really matters but on principle. I'm not trying to insult you, but personally I try not to argue about people or matters I consider stupid because then I'm spending time on something I ultimately consider dumb. I'm just reiterating precedent for not including a country with low peaks at this point. I apologise if you consider my tone insulting or aggressive and if that is responsible in part for how you responded. Anyway, please note my message above about adding a weekly charts subheading if you're adding a year-end charts section on song/album articles. It would be helpful if you could do this. Thanks!  Ss  112   01:24, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Just letting you know
Hi. Not meaning to continue an argument from yesterday, but with regards your recent edits to song articles I have a few suggestions/comments:
 * In general, charts and certifications sections have been separated over the years. There was a time a lot of song articles combined the sections, then a group of editors made it a point to stop combining the sections (and even went out of their way to remove it where it had been done), so in general, there's no real compelling reason to combine (or re-combine) them under one encompassing heading. Based on what I've seen, you will probably run into opposition if you make it a point to combine them where they're not.
 * When the sections have been combined, the general heading grouping the sections was pretty well standardised as "Charts and certifications". I have never seen "Commercial performance statistics" as a heading and while technically correct, this isn't a widely understood heading on song articles, but as I pointed out, there's not really a compelling reason to combine charts and certifications sections on song articles anymore.
 * Squeezing information into three columns in one section is almost never done on music articles. From comments I've picked up, this would be seen as overkill and compacting too much information into one section. Two columns maximum with weekly charts in the first and year-end/decade-end/any others in the second is usually the way to go. Also, bear in mind if it's a short article, even two columns cannot easily fit in next to an infobox so should be avoided.
 * Template:Certification Table Top has the caption= parameter built in. There's no need to use |+ [Caption] to add a caption below the template.
 * Introducing spaces around headings (== Like this == versus a heading already ==Like this==) divides some editors. If you're making some of an article's headings spaced when the rest are unspaced, you're going to find some editors will take issue with this. In general unless you're making it consistent with the rest of the article's headings I'd say avoid purely cosmetic changes.
 * I noticed you were copy-pasting some citations with access-dates from 2021 when you were adding these to articles this month. Please remember in future to change the access-date to the current day you're adding it to the article.
 * The access date is when a source was first accessed by a user at any time, regardless if not done so for an article, not when it was added to an article. So no, the access date should not be changed. 👨x🐱 ( Nina Cortex x Coco Bandicoot ) 21:41, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Template:Cite web says "access-date: Full date when the content pointed to by url was last verified to support the text in the article" (not another article; emphasis added). Also "access-date is the date that the URL was found to be working and to support the text being cited". As you hopefully verified it the day you added it to see that it still works and you're the one adding it to articles, it should say the date you added it to that specific article.  Ss  112   21:48, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Finally, it's best to observe the date format used on an article. If you're copy-pasting a citation to an article that uses dmy date format (like for a British or European topic), change the date format in your citation to dmy. Thanks.  Ss  112   21:35, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to add as I forgot earlier: there's no need to specify the musical artist in each table caption. It makes it unnecessarily wordy (and past the length of the table in most cases), and the general wording for tables on music articles was brought up on the WP:ACCESS talk page in 2020. Identifying the work is usually enough, and I've come across plenty of accessibility-focussed editors since who've seen no need for it. On pages that list multiple cover versions by different artists I can understand, but most song (and obviously basically all album) articles don't have multiple artists' covers listed.  Ss  112   03:47, 4 April 2022 (UTC)


 * I didn't know. You should place Template:In use at the top of articles if you're actively editing the page (and remove it when you're done). Even still, please note what I said about "accessdate". There's future plans to deprecate it so it should be modernised to the current access-date—it will just be done by a bot down the line anyway.  Ss  112   23:44, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bucky O'Hare (NES video game)
The article Bucky O'Hare (NES video game) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Bucky O'Hare (NES video game) 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 Artem.G -- Artem.G (talk) 11:21, 9 January 2022 (UTC)