User talk:Ronherry/Archives/2021/November

Lana Del Rey's genres
I'm not going to remove alternative pop because I don't want to start an edit war. For what concerns me, even twelve genres are fine as long as they are well sourced. I just want to say that previously the genres of that article continuously changed, there were several edit wars, until we discussed in the talk page (as indeed it's written in the hidden comment inside the infobox). At this point I don't understand why users are exhorted to "discuss in the talk pages" and "reach consensus". --Blueberry72 (talk) 19:56, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Do whatever you want. All I did was to follow what Wikipedia asks me to do, make articles better—I removed redundant sources the body and added a genre she's well-known by. That's it. Regards. Ronherry (talk) 06:42, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

What
I tried to have consensus with you. I don't understand why you so passive aggressive to me? The edit was meant good, because when read you read it, without having the source, it just doesn't match. Mirrored7 (talk) 10:26, 1 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi. Firstly, consensus is not achieved when you simply edit war, irrespective of your good faith. Go to talk page to form consensus regarding content that's already existing on the article. Secondly, do not resort to insulting editors because it won't help you get anywhere on Wikipedia and will only promote bad faith. Calling me "passive aggressive" is a highly personal comment and is not tolerated on Wikipedia. Thirdly, if you think a sentence is insufficiently phrased, then you must rephrase it; however, that is not what you did. You simply removed the entire prose + citation, displaying disruptive behavior on a good article, even though you were informed about how Billboard explicitly supports the factoid. In conclusion, keeping in mind your track record here on Wikipedia, I would suggest you stop, listen, communicate with the concerned editors and learn, when you are reverted with proper reasons. Regards. Ronherry (talk) 10:42, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Pictures
I would like to reach a compromise on the issue of photos in the article on Taylor Swift. It stands as before, and once again, I am dead serious. If you want to, you can drop me a reply here or on my talk page. Nerd271 (talk) 18:39, 1 November 2021 (UTC)


 * I'm not gonna do a bargain or a negotiation like you want. Not gonna exchange favours either. I stand by the edits I already made. The photo of Swift with a banjo stays, and so does the 1989 one. Ronherry (talk) 20:22, 1 November 2021 (UTC)


 * And yet you accuse me of edit-warring when it was I who suggested a compromise. Nerd271 (talk) 21:21, 1 November 2021 (UTC)


 * You realize time stamps exist on Wikipedia? I think we all know who initiated what first. Ronherry (talk) 21:30, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

RfC
A RfC has begun at WT:ALBUM regarding the year-end or decade-end tables should be cut down. Please add your comments there if interested. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 11:05, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 8
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Blue Banisters, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Folk.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Folklore (Taylor Swift album) tracks
Template:Folklore (Taylor Swift album) tracks has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 00:18, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

"Dashes only mean an album didn't chart"
Hi. Regarding your removal of dashes on Taylor Swift albums discography, this can be seen as an expectation of a chart position and according to how you want to look at it, a violation of WP:CRYSTALBALL. I'm well aware what a prolific and popular artist Taylor Swift is and that maybe the album is "guaranteed" to chart because of her status in popular culture. But at this current stage (before the majority of charts are published), the album hasn't charted and may not in some countries—unlikely it may be, but still possible. We should not leave blank spaces for albums or singles that have just been released—this is not widely done (meaning there is precedent to not do so) and for good reason. Thanks.  Ss  112   06:42, 19 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Okay, duly noted. Ronherry (talk) 10:19, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Only the Young (Taylor Swift song)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Only the Young (Taylor Swift song) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kyle Peake -- Kyle Peake (talk) 08:01, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Only the Young (Taylor Swift song)
The article Only the Young (Taylor Swift song) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Only the Young (Taylor Swift song) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kyle Peake -- Kyle Peake (talk) 12:21, 28 November 2021 (UTC)