User talk:Livelikemusic/Talk Page Archive 26

Re: Brightest Blue, with Discogs.com as not a reliable source
Thank you for your edit which brought this to my attention! I had seen Discogs.com used in citations for other albums. Thanks again, CharlesTStokes (talk) 14:30, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

The Voice season 20 page
Hey, someone started a Wikipedia page for season 20 of The Voice. Wouldn't that be considered a violation of the crystal ball guidelines? I couldn't find any information online about an official season 20 premiere date. Please advise at your earliest convenience. Thanks in advance! :) Disney1024 (talk) 18:31, 20 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Please ignore my inquiry. The article already got deleted. Take care and have a great day! :) Disney1024 (talk) 05:10, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Sugababes - Taller in More Ways (Official Album Cover) (2005).png
Thanks for uploading File:Sugababes - Taller in More Ways (Official Album Cover) (2005).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) 03:54, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Louis Tomlinson World Tour
Hey, I just wanted to clarify that I was going on a rollbacking spree (my awkward nickname for it LOL) because the user that fixed the information is also known as the infamous Hanoi vandal, so I serial-revert all of their contributions, useful or not. Thank you for changing back to the correct version at Louis Tomlinson World Tour, sorry for the inconvenience. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 01:12, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * As well, I reposted this as I know your talk page has rules, and this is what every other editor seems to be doing on your talk page, so I thought I’d try it. D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 01:14, 3 February 2021 (UTC)


 * No inconvenience at all; just did not want the violence to remain. As for reposting, thank you. OCD is a fucking nasty bitch sometimes.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 01:21, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay, thank you for clarifying. As well, it’s fine, I remembered you wanted things done in a certain way, so I checked the page history to find a pattern. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 01:33, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

2020–present
Hello – I've noticed that you tend to apply "–present" to Hollyoaks characters, but only to those introduced in 2020. Could I ask why? I know you're applying DATETOPRES, but it's inconsistent to only add it to certain characters. I'd find it much more beneficial to add it to every current character, like I did myself with the Doctors characters a while ago. That way, it's consistent within the Hollyoaks wikiverse. – DarkGlow (contribs • talk) 15:06, 22 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I have been adding –present to characters concerning Hollyoaks over time. Technically, this is a Manual of Style which must be followed, both per the MOS and per . Unfortunately, Australian and British soap editors—as well as anonymous editors—like to ignore and revert the Manual of Style for their own preferred style. I should also mention portrait images were discussed for use on character articles, and majority of the discussion was in favour of screencaptured images, as portraits are predominately of cast, not character.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 15:20, 22 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Don't get me wrong – I agree with it being added! I just noticed that there are a lot of characters without it, leading to some inconsistency. I don't mind blasting through them to add –present if it's taking a while. And in regards to the images, I disagree. If there is a promotional image of a cast member on set in their character costume, I believe that to be a character image, not a cast member image. They don't dress/pose like that as themselves, only for portraying their character. – DarkGlow (contribs • talk) 15:26, 22 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I have applied it to several stand-alone articles, ie Ste Hay and Mercedes McQueen, and it is definitely fought against. Plus, cast/character pages also need to adhere to MOS:TABLECAPTION and MOS:DTAB, which are also built to adhere to MOS:ACCESS. I know that task will be a major undertaking overtime. As for the images, I do recall many stating publicity stills/screencaptured images should be the preferred image. I understand British soaps do take images of actors in-character on the set, which is something American soaps do not do. I guess it comes to preference at that point. I just believe screencaptured images are less disputable than professionally-taken publicity portraits.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 15:33, 22 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I'll go through as many characters as I can and add "–present". As for images, I've recently been updating characters' images more often, and I think professional images are better than screenshots. Like, this is definitely a cast member photo, but this is a character photo; the difference is clear. – DarkGlow (contribs • talk) 15:43, 22 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Excellent! It is partially why I removed "2020" from the 2020 character page until January 1, 2021, because 2020 was technically the present and the year is redundant for the currently present year. Re-images: I guess it's just the vast difference from American soaps. Like, this and this are considered portraits of the actors, not the characters, despite some being taken on-set, and I do believe that was part of the discussion.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 15:47, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Harrison Chase
This edit followed by this one is disruptive. The criteria for speedy deletion states "A page is eligible for speedy deletion only if all of its revisions are also eligible.", so blanking an article and subsequently trying to tag it with WP:A3 ("no content") does not work. I have converted the page into a redirect. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  14:54, 8 March 2021 (UTC)


 * That is more than fine. No harm no foul. Long time no speak, either. Hope all is well!  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 14:56, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , Yeah, this nothing more than trout-worthy, but I have seen actual vandals, POV pushers and trolls try and pull that stunt before, which is why the policy has that wording. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  15:04, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:InsideStory.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:InsideStory.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) 02:35, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

April 2021
 You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (General Hospital) for a period of 1 week for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. — UwU wug's this? 21:55, 1 April 2021 (UTC)


 * May I ask why it is permitted, while a discussion is on-going, for an editor to change content to their preferred version, especially when a dispute was in-progress—which I may also not I never reverted once resolution had begun? That seems to violate the idea of what the WP:CYCLE stands for, no? Also, why were the personal attacks never addressed, when they were outlined very clearly, and made at extreme costs, and when they were made against me under false accusation, they were acceptable? That seems of uncivil behaviour, both in retaliation of the accusations within the report—all of which were supported via edits made—and poor etiquette? I'm just hoping for an explanation to further help me understand, and am hopeful you might be able to provide it.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 00:48, 2 April 2021 (UTC)


 * This edit war has been going on for days. You point to WP:BRD, but it took over 24 hours and four reverts on your part until you got to the "discuss" part and posted on the talk page. That alone is a problem, but you still kept going. Your claim that you never reverted once resolution had begun is false. After the talk page post you made two more reverts: 30 March and 31 March. Looking at the page history I had every reason to believe you would keep going with the reverts, and it's obvious you knew what you were doing; Dan pointed out your behavior on other articles, and a little over a month ago I warned you about upload warring. That said, you are correct that it is not appropriate to revert while discussion is ongoing, that's why the other person is also blocked. However that is not a reason for you to continue reverting. Per the edit warring policy: Users who engage in edit wars risk being blocked or even banned. An editor who repeatedly restores their preferred version is edit warring, regardless of whether those edits are justifiable. Claiming "My edits were right, so it wasn't edit warring" is not a valid defense. Finally, you also displayed poor etiquette, and if I was going to hand out civility blocks you would also be getting one. In the EWN report, you took issue with this addition to Dan's user talk page. Looking at his talk page history, I can completely understand why he would add that: you repeatedly template him with warnings about the same page. First on 6 October, then again 2 weeks later, and once more a week ago. He gets it, and it is completely appropriate to ask you to stop. On Talk:General Hospital he raised concerns about your WP:OWNership (and since this problem seems to extend back months, it's a legitimate concern) and then immediately jump to implying he was personally attacking you. It just keeps escalating as you two keep baiting each other. There's some kind of animosity between you two beyond this particular incident. Whatever it is you both need to drop it because you are both behaving disruptively. — UwU wug's this? 02:19, 2 April 2021 (UTC)


 * While I understand the POV you are taking and the actions that were made, the personal attacks come from here (calling an editor 'less respectful,' as well as referring to me as a "kid," which speaks on editor, not contact—which is in-violation of the WP:PERSONAL definition. And, in my viewpoint—which while not relevant, I do feel needs to be stated—if the user "got it," then surely they should not have continued to make the edits after discussion had begun and an on-going noticeboard discussion had begun, no? As such, consensus was attempting to be built, and the user kept reverting the information, which from my understanding, should not be done while a discussion is on-progress—which explains why I returned the edit on 30 March—which is what I was always lead to believe should be done. And again did it on 31 March as discussion was just beginning. If wrong, then I apologise on that; it is a mistake I made and take ownership for, for as well mis-understanding the concept of the WP:BRD policy. Also, an edit summary such as this surely is not appropriate, either? Not to mention, to accuse me of only being here to begin edit-wars, which again, feels retaliatory, when my own near 15-year editing experience has proven otherwise? It is not assuming good faith when all I was attempting to do was following Wikipedia's policies on the matter in an attempt to not escalate further—albeit later than it surely should have happened, however, discussion should have been initiated after the user had first been reverted, no? I reverted—albeit wrongly—when the discussion was ignored and the same edits persisted. I guess that's just where I am dumbfounded by all of this, however, in no way is it an excuse for the actions that have been made. I can completely state this: I bare no animosity towards the editor-in-question, and apologise if it does come off as such, because I do not. Sorry if this is long-winded and a bit repetitive. Quite late here, and just want to completely understand fully, that is all, as I don't want to seem as if I am not respectful of you and your position, etc.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 03:03, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delay, I had some meatspace stuff come up and also wanted to let this sink in. I left a note on Dan's talk page (and tagged you) hoping to try and resolve this. You're right that Dan's behavior crossed a line, and I think it's more productive if we try and talk things through. Hopefully with a few days behind us things have cooled down and we can resolve this and ultimately unblock. — Wug·a·po·des​ 20:43, 7 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Don't apologize for the delay — we all have things we handle outside of Wikipedia, and in our own personal lives. I appreciate the acknowledgement, and I am will to discuss things out, so long as you are involved as a third-party.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 20:34, 8 April 2021 (UTC)


 * It seems as if this user is back to their same editing habits at the General Hospital page.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 03:52, 28 June 2021 (UTC)


 * And they don't seem interested in discussing anything at length... just to try and validate the edits being made. I hope I am wrong, but, given previous discussions never reseumed, despite your offer to step-in and help, it seems that way, at least, to me it does.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 13:48, 28 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Once again, they are continuing. Any way of stepping in at this point? They don't even seem to be interested in discussing. And judging from this edit, they're involved in the same kind of pattern of another editor.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 16:18, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Can we talk?
Can we discuss about something? DuaLipaFan23951 (talk) 00:42, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Chicago P.D. (Official Season 8 Poster).png
Thanks for uploading File:Chicago P.D. (Official Season 8 Poster).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) 17:13, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Confetti (album)
So, you reverted my edits, and I wanted you to give you the reason why I made those edits. One. I reason why I added a link to Wasabi is because a page was made for it recently, so I added it. Two. The reason why I moved the album’s singles commercial performances is because it was off topic from the album, and should be focused on the album’s commercial performance. Singles commercial performances belong in their own page unless you want to give it a short summary. For example, "Your Song" was released on January 1, 20XX as the lead single off the album. The song peaked at 27 on the Billboard Hot 100. That’s what I tried to do. Third. I added a section for other songs because NTFT, BB, AND OIBM were included in the expanded edition of Confetti, and I was moving things, so I added it. That’s why I made those edits. I was only helping. That’s all. Sorry if I made a mistake. DuaLipaFan23951 (talk) 03:27, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 21
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Guiding Light, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Victor Miller, Douglas Anderson and Christopher Dunn.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Nicholas Newman
Thank you for restoring the content on Nicholas Newman. Several IPs keep removing the content again and again, and last time when I restored it, it somehow reverted it. Thank you for restoring it, I don't know why it did that! The content keeps getting removed by IPs, which is very stressful. I requested protection recently but it was denied...DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 14:46, 30 June 2021 (UTC)


 * No problem. The anonymous editors are going to continue attacking pages; it's been happening for years, and it will never stop. Hopefully, by adding in a citation, it'll help.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 16:27, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Reversion
I reverted back your reversion because you didn’t just not add in an edit summary explaining why, but because the edit features a company (Walt Disney Television) that doesn’t even produce shows and was founded in 1985, not 1968 as you claim.

And doesn’t ABC produce General Hospital in-house without any Disney involvement? Luigitehplumber (talk) 20:04, 17 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Per the production credits of the soap itself, American Broadcasting Company (a.k.a. ABC) has distributed General Hospital since its inception, given the network owns the soap itself (unlike CBS and NBC soaps, which are produced via other companies). As for the statement of "without any Disney involvement," Disney owns ABC. Walt Disney Television is the most current company production name (since 2019), and was previously known as Capital Cities/ABC Inc. (1985–1996), ABC Group (1996–2004) and Disney–ABC Television Group (2004–2019). They're all the same company, just functioning under a different name. And the same with Disney–ABC Domestic Television, which changed its name over the years, due to change in management/ownership, but is still the same functioning company. All per the credits of the soap.   livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 04:57, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Clarification on John Finnegan or "Finn"
Hello, I just want to begin and thank you for all the helpful edits you have added to the pages of John Finnegan (The Bold and the Beautiful) and Steffy Forrester. I am not sure how familiar you are with Bold and Beautiful, or if you have watched recently; however, on the canvas, everyone refers to the male character as "Finn" (and to the audience, he is known as "Finn" not John). We just know that his actual birth name/full name is John Finnegan. The closing credits have him listed as "Dr. John Finnegan". Hence, why I often did the John "Finn" Finnegan throughout those pages. Even, the casting announcements of his arrival had him as John "Finn" Finnegan. Essentially, with this information, should John "Finn" Finnegan retain, or we leave it as "John Finnegan"?? If it is the latter, what is your reasoning?? I am just looking for some clarification, but again I am so appreciative of the help! — AwardShowFan123 (talk,  contribs ) 13:53, 24 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Admittedly, I have not watched The Bold and the Beautiful since 2019, however, do follow what's happening, etc. The problem with crediting fictional characters as "Dr.," especially when a name is known, is that they are not technically medically-issued doctors. This was discussed at length in the past when it came to crediting doctors, police officers, et al and it was decided to not credit them as such. Now, should a character simply be credited as "Dr. Smith," then that is how they should be credited, as a given first name is unknown. As such, we should always try and keep the mentioning of the topic to their common name, which is "John Finnegan." I'd also recommend looking at policies, such as WP:OVERLINK and BLPNAME, which state to only link a name once per article (after lead mention), and to only mention a BLP surname after their first mention, both within lead and body of article. Also, the storyline section for said-character is still too overly detailed for a character that just marked its one-year anniversary yesterday. Fluff, fan-driven detail should be limited, as it takes away from the real-world context of a fictional character. Hope this answers your questions.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 14:03, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for that clarification and those links, I am gaining a greater understanding of how to improve the page and the names of the character! Thank you as well for uploading a clearer screenshot/image for the page; all the help, advice, and suggestions is truly appreciated! — AwardShowFan123 (talk,   contribs ) 14:40, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Chicago P.D. (Official Season 8 Poster).png
Thanks for uploading File:Chicago P.D. (Official Season 8 Poster).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) 17:32, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Beyond Salem
I wanted to get your take on the upcoming Days of Our lives limited series Beyond Salem for Peacock - should it eventually get its own separate page? Let me know your thoughts. Partyclams (talk) 10:12, 9 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the delay—took a mental health break—but a Beyond Salem page should be created at such a time it can withstand the notability standards a standalone article should meet.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 22:27, 17 August 2021 (UTC)


 * I hope I'm responding to this correctly... firstly, I hope you're feeling better. I understand what you're saying. One question though, the characters or actors that are returning only for "Beyond Salem", should their character pages reflect this fact or because it's a sort of spin-off show, should they not? I know Lisa Rinna is coming back as Billie - when that happens in "Beyond Salem" should the Billie infobox reflect this fact? Then there's Eileen Davidson - no one knows what character she's playing yet. I guess that could get a bit iffy if she's playing Kristen DiMera and there's another actress playing the character on the main show. How would you reflect that in the infobox? Anyway, thanks for the response and the help! Again, I hope I responded to this correctly. I apologize if I haven't. I don't want to mess up your page. Partyclams (talk) 23:08, 17 August 2021 (UTC)


 * You responded just fine. And, thank you, I am doing better. Not one-hundred percent, but am slowly re-joining the community. Infobox soap character as a parameter for, so that is what would be used on the pages, such as Billie Reed once the spinoff premieres on the Peacock platform. As for Kristen DiMera, if that is the role Eileen Davidson is poised to portray, her information would be updated, and would co-exist alongside Stacy Haiduk, such as the temporary recasts with Arianne Zucker, Linsey Godfrey and Lauren Koslow in 2019 and 2021, respectively. Hope that answered your questions.   livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 23:18, 17 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Yes it does... but I'll probably come back and ask you to assist (when you have the time) so I don't mess anything up. ;) I'm glad you're doing better, and again, thanks so much for the response! Partyclams (talk) 05:12, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Genie Francis as Laura Spencer.png
Thanks for uploading File:Genie Francis as Laura Spencer.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) 17:23, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Spice Girls – 2 Become 1 (music video).png


The file File:Spice Girls – 2 Become 1 (music video).png has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Screenshot insufficiently supported by critical commentary of 2 Become 1. May fail WP:NFCC. Furthermore, image uploaded 12 years after the article's GA promotion."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Stephen Nichols as Steve Johnson.png
Thanks for uploading File:Stephen Nichols as Steve Johnson.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) 17:50, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Kevin Schmidt as Noah Newman.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Kevin Schmidt as Noah Newman.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) 17:16, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Robert Adamson as Noah Newman.png
Thanks for uploading File:Robert Adamson as Noah Newman.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) 17:28, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Donny Boaz as Chance Chancellor.png
Thanks for uploading File:Donny Boaz as Chance Chancellor.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) 18:10, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Kevin Schmidt as Noah Newman.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Kevin Schmidt as Noah Newman.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) 18:19, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Robert Adamson as Noah Newman.png
Thanks for uploading File:Robert Adamson as Noah Newman.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) 18:25, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Hunter Tylo as Taylor Hayes.png
Thanks for uploading File:Hunter Tylo as Taylor Hayes.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) 18:16, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Robert Adamson as Noah Newman.png
Thanks for uploading File:Robert Adamson as Noah Newman.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) 18:27, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Kevin Schmidt as Noah Newman.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Kevin Schmidt as Noah Newman.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) 18:28, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Nonsensical date ranges and the soap articles
When did the nonsensical "2022–present" "date ranges" return to the soap pages?! I thought we had licked this issue! Do we need to have another discussion about this somewhere? Clearly, people do not understand MOS:DATETOPRES... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:35, 24 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Sorry for delay! Been a bit busy as of late, and I honestly don't know where TF it came from, but it seems like newer users like to go against MOS. Guess another discussion is required, because I can't even keep up anymore!  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 03:24, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Going back to at least 2012, editors realized that "2022–present" like constructions are nonsensical, and that was a decade ago. But even our previous discussion at WT:MOSDATE did not definitively resolve the issue. I want to say there was a discussion at WT:FILMBIO on this issue (in 'Filmography' tables), but I can't find it, and it may be possible that is this was just a sideshow part of a larger (or different) discussion. (I know that I've discussed the issue with User:Ebyabe before, who agrees with us on this, though they don't look to be active lately, and were never active in the soaps articles, AFAIK.) There have been multiple discussions at my Talk page about it (e.g. this, as just one example), but that's hardly definitive. I sort of don't know how to proceed. The best option would be to have a discussion at WT:MOSDATE where there's a clear ruling that "2021–present", "January 2022 – present", and "March 20, 2022 – present" are all legitimate date ranges, but "2022–present" is not. But every time this has come up there before, it seems like the issue has not been clearly understood, like in our earlier 2019 discussion I linked to (and this simularly confused discussion)... I'm thinking a discussion in just the soap articles won't be fruitful, as some editors will push a WP:LOCALCONSENSUS angle. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:51, 25 March 2022 (UTC)


 * You and I are essentially on the same page—still, ten fucking years later—on this non-sensical issue. 2022–present is wrong, as 2022 is the present tense. I'd love to bring the issue back to MOS:DATETOPRES, but, as you've said, it has never produced a genuine result and, I doubt these years later, it'll produce something worth while. I do know, however, in music-related articles, they still use 2022 for present sections, even with people attempt to attach the –present.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 03:55, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I would say 2022–present type attempts are usually (though not always) reverted in Filmography tables too. The soap editors are definitely trying to pull a WP:LOCALCONSENSUS gambit on this. But I thought you have fixed these last year(?), so I was surprised when I went back to these articles this morning, and the 2022–present nonsense is back. Right now, three of the cast list articles have been "corrected" back, but there is pushback specifically at the DOOL cast list, so right now it doesn't even match the other 3. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 04:00, 25 March 2022 (UTC)


 * I thought I had, too, however, some new editors have been arriving in and attempting to implement their own beliefs into articles, and sometimes it is hard to fight a one-sided battle by one's self. And I am aware of the pusback; I've had similar interactions with the pusher, and even in attempting to reason, it seems to be a my way or the highway situation.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 04:03, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Susan Walters as Diane.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Susan Walters as Diane.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) 17:48, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

RHOSLC
Well actually they have Mary is fired, Jennie was fired and Andy confirmed on an episode on WWHL that there doing Season 3 and the cast I’ve added have been seen, videoed and photographed with the remained 5 women and u should know that 99.9% of the all the rumours are yea KingPags1201 (talk) 07:00, 19 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia runs on reliability; just because they are filming does not mean a third season will air. Not to mention, you've continued to add information again and again, and it continues to be reverted with explanation. Rumours hold no place on Wikipedia as Wikipedia does not speculate nor is it a tabloid. We must wait for the season to be announced with premiere date, per WP:TVGUIDE and MOS:TV. Please keep this in mind for the future.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 12:58, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Lucas Adams
The Days of our Lives writers changed Tripp Dalton’s last name to Johnson. Therefore,it should be known as such. Lucas Adams’ character name is now Tripp Johnson Smokiewight (talk) 07:26, 19 April 2022 (UTC)


 * I suggest you read WP:COMMONNAME, which is what we must follow. Not to mention, "Tripp Dalton" pulls About 2,730,000 results (0.42 seconds) search results, while Tripp Johnson pulls About 15,900,000 results (0.49 seconds) search results (multiple of which hold no baring to the character). The weight of Dalton still holds, especially in sourced material, therefore, it is what should be referenced.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 13:00, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Thorne 01.png
Thanks for uploading File:Thorne 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) 17:36, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

AIV
It's going to take a lot more to get an editor blocked per NOTHERE. And let me note that the first thing that stands out in this revert of yours is the enormous error in the first sentence. I don't know why "Shout Out To My Ex" shouldn't be listed. At any rate, your counterpart doesn't strike me as a NOTHERE editor. You cited OVERLINK for that Lil Nas X song, but MOS:REPEATLINK clearly applies there, since the repeated link is in an embedded list--the tracklist. So I cannot say that I am impressed with the reasons and arguments you present in order to get this person blocked, and you could have done a much better job explaining what you thought the problems were. Drmies (talk) 20:00, 24 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Forgive me, but their continued ignorance of MOS (which is a warn-able offense), despite being reverted for the violation, multiple times, surely shows a violation—to an extent—of WP:NOTHERE, no? And while MOS:REPEATLINK does state that, it also states: If the list is normal article prose that happens to be formatted as a list, treat it as normal article prose., which the set list is. The information listed would not aptly submitted as a table, therefore, the prose of WP:OVERLINK adheres, no? Or am I misinterpreting what it being written? Not to mention, the user refuses to acknowledge any communication with them of any kind, and continues to insist on the edits taking place (which may also showcase a sense of WP:OWN in some way, shape and/or form)? I'm just simply trying to understand is all.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 02:24, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
 * A persistent refusal to communicate is one thing--but there's nothing on the talk page but templated warnings, if I remember correctly. MOS violations need to be clearly documented, esp. since the MOS is huge. And while a post on the editor's talk page about MOS ins and outs may seem like a lot of work for nothing, in the end it will help admins decide whether someone is really intentionally disregarding our guidelines. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 13:59, 25 April 2022 (UTC)


 * I've tried explaining to them on their talk page and even asked them to acknowledge, and they continue to ignore any attempt at discussion and explanation of the MOS and how it is relating to the article, even after you reverted. At this point, they are disregarding the MOS, due to what they are not calling "changes to the format due to it being incorrect," which in fact they are not (as explained to them in relation to the page in-question).  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 15:20, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I see how uncommunicative they are, but I don't see your point, that "the list is normal article prose that happens to be formatted as a list". It's not "normal article prose"--it's a list of titles, which wouldn't be normal prose anywhere. But speaking of prose--isn't your time better spent improving the sometimes atrocious prose in that article? Drmies (talk) 15:31, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

It appears the user in-question returned from their one-block to immediate resume the same editing behaviour, citing "[O]nly singles must be linked to a page" and once again citing false grammatical errors, which there are none.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 12:44, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't mind blocking again, but what I really need to see first is a more detailed explanation of what their disruption consists of--and the best place to do that is their own talk page. If they do not respond there, then it's so much easier to point at the disruption in the block log, for instance. Drmies (talk) 14:18, 20 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Well, I did ask, once again, why they continue to ignore the MOS listed on the original talk page inquiry. Should I go in and explain their violation, per MOS bullet, or simply await for them to either respond and/or ignore the question once again? Just want to make sure I am not going outside the bound of anything, etc.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 14:28, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I saw that but it was so short, and I didn't realize it was new. Take some of those edits to that Confetti discography, put the diff on their talk page, explain in detail--and maybe corroborate that with a diff or two from other articles. Drmies (talk) 14:32, 20 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Sounds good to me! Will begin working on that shortly. Thanks, again!  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 14:34, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Little Mix member wikilinks
I don't understand why none of the listed members' names are not linked. All other group articles have them. I do not see why this page is an exception for their page. Btspurplegalaxy 🗩 🖉 22:51, 14 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Linking them more than once violates the WP:OVERLINK policy.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 23:52, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
 * That wouldn't work in this case. You can go to other articles of groups and see them linked. Btspurplegalaxy</b> <b style="color:#50C878">🗩</b> <b style="color:#9D9E9E">🖉</b> 23:54, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
 * If it was a problem, none of the articles would have that. Here are examples of the names being wikilinked: The Beatles, Fifth Harmony, BTS, Destiny Child, and One Direction. <b style="color:#00BFFF; font-family:magion">Btspurplegalaxy</b> <b style="color:#50C878">🗩</b> <b style="color:#9D9E9E">🖉</b> 23:58, 14 May 2022 (UTC)


 * No offense, but there are multiple articles that presently violate MOS and other policies. That simply does not mean it is right, especially when policy and MOS is ever-evolving and changing. MOS and policy override what other articles do. It is what we must follow.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 00:06, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Per MOS:REPEATLINK it shouldn't be a problem. <b style="color:#00BFFF; font-family:magion">Btspurplegalaxy</b> <b style="color:#50C878">🗩</b> <b style="color:#9D9E9E">🖉</b> 00:11, 15 May 2022 (UTC)


 * The policy states: Generally, a link should appear only once in an article, but it may be repeated if helpful for readers, such as in infoboxes, tables, image captions, footnotes, hatnotes, and at the first occurrence after the lead. They ARE linked in Infobox musical artist in the caption; being mentioned several rows down, in a small-function infobox does not benefit readers simnifically.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 00:14, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
 * It clearly does not violate any guidelines, so I do not why you're adamant on them not being linked. Especially when so many group pages have wikilinks in the lead, image captions, and listed members. Specifically, when these articles are of FA status and higher, where overlinking would certainly be even more prioritized. <b style="color:#00BFFF; font-family:magion">Btspurplegalaxy</b> <b style="color:#50C878">🗩</b> <b style="color:#9D9E9E">🖉</b> 00:25, 15 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Again, it does violate. And I've you just because other articles do it does not mean it's acceptable for all. MOS triumphs over what articles choose to ignore, especially when MOS is ever-evolving. And being a FA/GA does not mean it would be more of a priority of those that are not. edit-warring this issue to own the page is also not have discussion works. Once again, the quote I provided (which should be re-read) came from MOS:REPEATLINK—which you presented—and also has the secondary shortcut link of MOS:LINKONCE. The question becomes is it helpful for readers to repeat the link within the same area of a smaller infobox (because it states it may be repeated not it should be repeated)? And the answer is no, it wouldn't. I could possibly understand if the infobox were more filled, but it is not in this instance.  livelikemusic   ( TALK! ) 00:29, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Taking that into account, then I think it would be more helpful if only the listed members were linked instead of the image caption. I feel it would be more beneficial that way. <b style="color:#00BFFF; font-family:magion">Btspurplegalaxy</b> <b style="color:#50C878">🗩</b> <b style="color:#9D9E9E">🖉</b> 00:39, 15 May 2022 (UTC)


 * }

Orphaned non-free image File:Finola Hughes as Anna Devane.png
Thanks for uploading File:Finola Hughes as Anna Devane.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) 17:12, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 17
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Confetti Tour, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Show Me Love.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Laura Wright as Carly Corinthos.png
Thanks for uploading File:Laura Wright as Carly Corinthos.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) 17:34, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Sarah Joy Brown as Carly Corinthos (2014).png
Thanks for uploading File:Sarah Joy Brown as Carly Corinthos (2014).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) 17:51, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Tamara Braun as Carly Corinthos (2014).png
Thanks for uploading File:Tamara Braun as Carly Corinthos (2014).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) 17:53, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 2
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Confetti Tour, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Show Me Love.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:26, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 14
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Confetti Tour, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Show Me Love.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 6
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of General Hospital cast members, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James West.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; "> 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) 00:35, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Louisa Johnson - Forever Young (Official Single Cover).png
Thanks for uploading File:Louisa Johnson - Forever Young (Official Single Cover).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) 18:22, 20 December 2022 (UTC)