User talk:Y2kcrazyjoker4/Archive 14

Template:Infobox World Series
Hello, Can you explain in more detail how this edit breaks the infobox ? I'm not trying to be a pain, but I don't see how changing the link target to a page you get to anyway can interfere with the template. Thanx, -  Mlpearc  ( open channel ) 20:43, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * The entire purpose of the links are to be able to navigate between World Series articles. I'd like to go from "2009 World Series" to "2010 World Series", not "2010 MLB season". Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 21:08, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Ok, thank you, somehow, I guess I missed the difference in link targets, weird  -  Mlpearc  ( open channel ) 22:25, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

2 things
Hello. On the Achtung Baby page, the Spin Magazine rating - it's just a square. what does it mean? I tried looking up their rating system with no luck. Maybe "positive" would suffice? And also I think the titling can be "Critical reception". I don't think that just means from "Critics". the readers polls could be spun off into "Accolades" even. -- Jennica ✿ talk / contribs 22:23, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * The Spin magazine ratings at the time were stoplight colors - red, gold, green. These were usually given as a colored circled or the first letter of each review was set in a large font and colored the rating color. The "critical reception" sounds to me to refer specifically to music critics. I don't see why the exact wording recommended by the Album project guidelines needs to be used in this case. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 23:30, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Vegas Golden Knights colors
Hello Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk), I'm just curious as to how you derived the HTML color codes for the Vegas Golden Knights? Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 03:04, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Not sure what makes you think I did anything related to the colors for the Knights. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 13:46, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Recent NHL team reverts
You're basically in an edit war on the LA Kings article already and until you can come to some agreement with Gmatsuda you need to stop what doing with the lead in these articles. Also, if no agreement can be reached then we're obligated to use the versions that existed prior to the dispute. If you would like a larger group to assess the changes you're proposing please take it over to the WikiProject. Deadman137 (talk) 21:43, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Google Developers logo.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Google Developers logo.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:22, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Baseball Module Color
Do you watch baseball? Have you seen the Arizona Diamondbacks' jerseys? Do you see in them or even in their logo anything of the color sand? I simply updated it since no one had since 2015 and you can look up their logo and uniforms and see they removed the sand from their team color.

Reference errors on 4 January
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:34, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * On the Lonely Boy (The Black Keys song) page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=758331459 your edit] caused an unsupported parameter error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F758331459%7CLonely Boy (The Black Keys song)%5D%5D Ask for help])

Hi
Just as a helpful hint, maybe try to stear away from intentionally telling people that, when they spend their time trying to help build Wikipedia, that the articles being worked on are "just degrading". Wikipedia is going to lose contributors if editors write that, and this place isn't exactly flooding with people writing. Even if you think the quality is bad, writing stuff like that is rude. I tried my best. LocalNet (talk) 05:41, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

I am trying to reach you on the talk page of the Google Play Music article. Please respond there. LocalNet (talk) 21:10, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Been a few years...
For your interest as a primary editor, "Mothers of the Disappeared" is nominated at TFAR for 9 March. Melicans (talk, contributions) 17:20, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Good to see you're still around! Thanks for keeping me informed about this, I was wondering if there was anything we could do for the Joshua Tree anniversary. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 02:01, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Avoiding An Edit War!
Hi, my reason is that the picture of the singer in question is simply Bono - there is nothing in the background to clearly indicate that he was performing at a concert venue or a television studio - It could even have been in a shopping mall like Tiffany in the 80s (probably not!)

Regards

Pam-javelin (talk) 07:32, 1 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Except, he wasn't at a mall. He was in Cleveland, Ohio during the band's tour (why on Earth that matters, I have no idea). I personally viewed other photographs by the photographer from this concert and personally contacted him about using his photo in WikiCommons. So I would know that this is not from a mall or a studio. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 12:45, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

A bit obsessive with the photographer - maybe he should be worried! - (just joking) If you are clearly going to that level of investigation then I will accept what you state over the matter and will not revert it further.

keep up the good work!

Regards

Pam-javelin (talk) 06:28, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Sarajevo (reprise)
So a few years ago I suggested we try to take U2 concert in Sarajevo to FA. Then I vanished for a few years so nothing really happened. But thankfully you didn't vanish, and since the 20th anniversary is later this year I thought it might be worthwhile to see if we can work it up to an FA status in time for a mainpage feature. What do you think? I'm incredibly rusty so I won't be able to get it there without your help. Melicans (talk, contributions) 17:52, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I think that's a good idea. It's about time we pushed for some articles to get to the next level (e.g. The Joshua Tree, U2 Live at Red Rocks: Under a Blood Red Sky, Songs of Innocence (U2 album)). I think we should start by checking for any dead links in references. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 18:23, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * As you may see, I've also trying to give the main U2 article a good overhauling, since a lot of the prose is lacking detail or stale, has been uncited for a while, or is based on old references that are broken. I'm tackling one period at a time by working in my sandbox first. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 18:39, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hopefully there won't be too many dead links in the articles. I remember when I did a bunch of GAs that were stub/start five or six years ago I always tried to archive the links in case they went down at some point, and that went for some of the other articles too. Most of the ones at GA, or that are close to GA, probably aren't too far off the FA mark. Along with the ones you listed (by the way, great work on the SOI article!) War Tour, Love Is Blindness, Stay (Faraway, So Close!), Exit (U2 song), Moment of Surrender, and Running to Stand Still are all probably somewhere close to FA. There are 24 GA U2-related articles. At a quick skim I'd say at least 15, maybe even 20 of those, wouldn't take too much work to promote (based on what I remember of FA standards). Melicans (talk, contributions) 18:58, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hang on, what happened to Slug? Did someone finally act on their length complaints and get it deleted? Melicans (talk, contributions) 18:59, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * It's still here: Slug (song) Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 19:16, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, it isn't on the GA list in that link anymore. Did it get demoted? Melicans (talk, contributions) 19:26, 10 February 2017 (UTC) Oh wow, it got promoted? Awesome! That was always my biggest regret after leaving. I've gotta thank whoever took it through that. Melicans (talk, contributions) 19:29, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Looks like there are two dead links in the Sarajevo article; if Wayback doesn't have anything I'll look for some alternates. Melicans (talk, contributions) 03:59, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

March 2017
You have been blocked for 24 hours from editing for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Animals (Pink Floyd album). Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. 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. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  19:39, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Seriously, I cannot believe somebody who is capable of writing FAs would pick such a needless spat over something so trivial and inconsequential. What a disappointment. :-( Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  19:52, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I can't believe you are resorting to such a desperate action when all you could have done was ban the sockpuppet. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 19:53, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Do you mind if I unblock per the socking? --Neil N  talk to me 20:56, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I do mind actually, people should be commenting on the content, not the contributor (especially when the other party makes a valid point and supplies sources). Please address the personal attacks in the edit summaries first. I'd turn a blind eye to blocking if there'd been substantial work in these articles, but there's just been a silly edit war that has lit up several articles on my watchlist that I have spent substantial time improving. So I would like to see a comment about the incivility. FWIW I would decline that unblock request as WP:NOTTHEM. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  21:07, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Please point out the uncivil edit summaries. --<b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 21:11, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, "it doesnt matter what you think, YOU are not a reliable source. Find one or dont add this" and "YOU are the only one that is that undoes my editions, so if you do not agree you are looking for an edition that is more appropriate and don't be envious, in vain you are not a wikipedia editor, work don't be lazy" aren't what I would describe as collegial. WP:AVOIDYOU has this pretty much covered. (See also the brilliant essay How to disagree by Paul Graham - all of his stuff is worth reading, particularly the stuff that talks about the Milgram experiment which may explain some admin behaviour). Civility is much more than Eric Corbett or Cassianto dropping the 'C' word. On their own, they just merit an "oy, out of order", but accompanied by silly edit warring makes a block necessary while I figure stuff out.
 * Also, Neil, the last time I pulled a cowboy unblock on an admin who disagreed with it (it was for those keeping score), I got hauled off to ANI and threatened to be desysopped. Don't let the same thing happen to you! I was very tempted to unblock  the other day, but I held out, saying "if I unblock you I'll be bollocked, yelled at being INVOLVED and maybe desysopped". (Obviously I am far too INVOLVED to ever take admin action on Blofeld, having done about 25 GA reviews with him). I'm not precious about blocks so I don't mind if somebody reverts them, but other admins take real exception to them. <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk)  <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  22:17, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I think there's a significant difference between Sagaciousphil's block and this one. And the second, more objectionable diff, is actually from the sock. If you want to discuss this further my talk page is open. --<b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 02:55, 18 March 2017 (UTC)


 * , I don't think this is a fantastic block and I'm concerned you may be too close to the situation to act clearly as an admin. Your comment "there's just been a silly edit war that has lit up several articles on my watchlist that I have spent substantial time improving" (emphasis mine) and this recent discussion about the same cluster of articles give me pause that you are too wrapped up in these articles as an editor to be able to act as an admin. -- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 21:22, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I think there's been a bit of confusion, and I apologise for that. While I have been a fan of Pink Floyd for some decades and done substantial work on Atom Heart Mother in particular, I generally haven't touched most of the other album articles. I don't think I've ever made any contributions to the Animals article, and if I have, they'll be just minor gnoming stuff. To be honest, most of the Floyd work was in pretty good shape when I got hold of it, and it's only really David Gilmour and Nick Mason's articles that are stopping Floyd becoming a Good Topic. Why don't we put this behind us and work towards a common goal such as that? <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  22:17, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

The Joshua Tree
Time to discuss the issue. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 21:20, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Dubious?
Unsure as to why you reverted my edit on Pumped Up Kicks and labeled it as dubious. There is a popularly accepted definition of what a one-hit wonder is and the song fits the category. Is the category of one-hit wonder not notable enough? What's the issue with this category tag? Eseress (talk) 05:00, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * The category itself is dubious and does not need to exist. See WP:OVERCAT, specifically about non-defining characteristics. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 05:22, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Alright. Feel free to delete it. Eseress (talk) 13:16, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

U2 chronology
Thanks for this. Their discography gets really complicated in the late 1990s but that was from the easy part! ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:29, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Very understandable - which is why I was curious about video releases (as well as fan-club exclusives). Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 16:30, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Champion (Fall Out Boy song)
There's a question about "arena rock". 183.171.180.137 (talk) 14:49, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Craig Carton article
Thanks for your edits on Craig Carton. I too noticed the "newsy" tone, and was trying to fix it. (See my edits) I appreciate your efforts! The article is better because of your editing. I can't thank you enough! Juneau Mike (talk) 20:12, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Lego Island
Hey there, please be sure that this question is eleven years late and I guess you probably won't remember, but it's worth a shot: On 16 August 2006, you added the following dates to the Lego Island article: November 26, 1997 in North America and February 9, 1998 in Europe and Japan. The NA and EU have only been changed by on 4 May 2008 to the ones we currently have in place still. The question here is: Do you recall where you got these dates from, or were sure that they were correct? Since we have just about no sources on the matter, I want to make sure we have at least the right info. Lordtobi ( &#9993; ) 21:22, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I would really appreciate if you took the time to reply to my above question, pinging you as a reminder . Lordtobi  ( &#9993; ) 20:14, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry I haven't replied yet. I honestly don't even remember adding that date to the article - if it came from somewhere, perhaps it was a review of the game from somewhere like IGN or Gamespot. That's the best I can think of, unfortunately. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 21:10, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah, shoot! I just happened to have found a source (press release from Mindscape) giving us September 26, that being our only sourcable date, it is now in the article. Thanks for trying to remember though! { Lordtobi  ( &#9993; ) 23:29, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Songs of Innocence (U2 album)
The article Songs of Innocence (U2 album) 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:Songs of Innocence (U2 album) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of ElectricController -- ElectricController (talk) 20:01, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

U2 SOE
Metacritic's score of 62 indicates "generally favorable reviews"...not mixed. Also the majority of the reviews cited in the article are positive, so it wouldn't reflect the article properly to say it's gotten "mixed reviews." Shkee23 (talk) 14:49, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Songs of Experience (U2 album)
Hey, you seem to be the main contributor to this article. Can you cut down the number of reviews in the ratings template to 10 per MOS:ALBUM/Template:Album ratings? Someone's added an 11th and I don't know which would be best to be cut out. Thanks.  Ss  112   00:12, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Sure... I think the RTE review can be removed, and eventually once the Pitchfork review is release, the Allmusic once can be removed. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 06:33, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Talk:U2
Please have a look at:

Talk:U2

Da Vinci Nanjing (talk) 19:21, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Songs of Experience (U2 album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Andy Barlow ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Songs_of_Experience_%28U2_album%29 check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Songs_of_Experience_%28U2_album%29?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). 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) 20:39, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Warren Zevon
There is a new cereal commercial out (Kellogg's?) that appears to use the beginning of the song "Werewolves of London" by Warren. Did his estate license the song? Is it a copyright violation? Vedawms (talk) 01:52, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Genre source
Hi Y2kcrazyjoker4. I noticed you removed my source for the genres of U2's "Hold Me, Thrill Me, Kiss Me, Kill Me". This is the second time I've used a bad source and I'm not able to tell which ones are okay to use on Wikipedia because I always seem to find all the wrong sites. Just my luck. I think it'd be helpful if you gave me some suggestions on where to go so I don't make this mistake a third time and have to delete everything I've contributed to genre identification (I had to go through seven articles including three I created and remove all the unreliable information). I don't consider hunting for genres one of my main goals as a Wikipedian, but it'd still be helpful to know where to go. I'd appreciate a response. Thanks. Nowmusicfan2816 (talk) 02:01, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
 * RateYourMusic is entirely based on user voting/rating, which is not a reliable source. A reliable source would be a description from a critic at a music publication. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 01:54, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for clearing up my mess at Foster the People. I confused the edits of the IP editors. -- Scjessey (talk) 14:10, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Chromecast logo.png
Thanks for uploading File:Chromecast logo.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, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

your revert on U2's Joshua Tree
While it's possible that U2 could have heard of MBV thru Gavin Friday of the Virgin Prunes, MBV had moved to continental Europe by 1984 (not Ireland), were not even remotely a commercially significant band, and were still playing bad garage rock that probably wouldn't inspire U2. Unless you've found a reliable source explicitly calling mid-80s pre-"Ecstasy and Wine" MBV an influence on this 1987 U2 album, your revert must be reverted as speculation not fact. If you have found a reliable source for this, I'll be well stunned. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad (talk) 15:21, 1 June 2018 (UTC)


 * OK, I looked at your source. Dan Lanois does specifically mention MBV, it's right there. You and I both know that this is patently false and he's getting his years mixed up, because there is no "textural guitar work" in MBV in 1985 or 1986, and U2 only rips off styles that have already been famous for 2-3 years (like Madchester on Achtung Baby). But, since it is in a reference, and Lanois isn't around to admit that he was mixed up, I have to defer to your revert, because anything else is WP:OR. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad (talk) 15:57, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Songs of Experience "Genre"
I'll simply begin this by saying that I'm new here, so I am no expert when it comes to the craft of editing. It makes sense for someone of your stature, wisdom, and experience to revert my edit. But, I'm glad that we can get a chance discuss this. To be straight to the point, I believe that the stated genre for U2's latest release is inaccurate. It has no source nor claim to back up such statement. And as for someone who has listened to the record is just purely not true. It does has its pop moments ("You're the best thing about me" and "Love is bigger than anything in its way" comes to mind). But on the flipside of things, songs like "American Soul" and "Blackout" are not what one will call "Pop Rock." To summarize, all I'm saying is that the album as a whole, as a cohesive unit should be simply labelled as a "Rock" album. The reason being because it draws influences from many genres from the rock spectrum. I hope this discussion gets brought to others so that a consensus can be reached. I apologize if I seem to be a nuisance or wasting your time, but I think this is for the best. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flight55555 (talk • contribs) 06:55, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Halt and Catch Fire (TV series), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fast Company ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Halt_and_Catch_Fire_%28TV_series%29 check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Halt_and_Catch_Fire_%28TV_series%29?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). 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) 09:32, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

June 2018
Hello User:Y2kcrazyjoker4, i believe you made a mistake, you've recently reverted edits to Beautiful Day, Elevation, Electrical Storm to your own revision, there wasn't anything wrong with the edits, they were fine. 112.208.47.57 (talk) 00:52, 10 June 2018


 * No, they were not. They were not improvements on the way the article was. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 00:54, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

What makes you think they were not improvements to the article. 112.208.47.57 01:00, 10 June 2018
 * Compared to a structure such as "Song xyz was released as a single on 9 October 2000", writing that "Song xyz was released on 9 October 2000 as a single" is not a great way to construct the sentence, both grammatically and in terms of the order in which you are providing the info. It's far more important to tell the reader the song was released as a single first (and thus answering the question "released as what/how"?) then to tell them the release date. Other changes of yours were simply not grammatically correct. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 01:38, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

I understand, but still there wasn't anything wrong with it, the sentences were fine. It doesn't matter whether or not, It still makes sense. 112.208.47.57 2:42, 10 June 2018 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.208.47.57 (talk)

A Barnstar for you!

 * Thank you! I have plans to nominate it eventually... first, I'd really like to add a Themes section, expand details on the main characters, and add in other bits and pieces (production/costume design, music, main titles). But it's come a long way in a short amount of time! Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 21:17, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Here's a great source regarding the title sequence. Again, awesome work! HACF quickly became one of my favorite TV shows of all-time during its run, and I love seeing the passion from other editors reflected in the quality of the article! Drovethrughosts (talk) 21:45, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Agreed, I'm glad to see there's another fellow fan out there reading. I actually have that Art of the Title article bookmarked (good looking out!), and within the next few days, I intend to go through it thoroughly. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 21:49, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

June 2018
Hello User:Y2kcrazyjoker4. Your edit that you reverted to this page in which you believe is not an improvement. There clearly isn't anything wrong with the wording, they were fine, it doesn't matter whether or not, there's no need to change them, the reader can still identify them just fine. 112.208.42.121 23:21, 11 June 2018 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.208.42.121 (talk)

New Page Patrol?
Hi Y2kcrazyjoker4,

I've recently been looking for editors to invite to join New Page Patrol, and after reviewing your editing history, I think you would be a good candidate. Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; we could use some additional help from an experienced user like yourself.

Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? (After gaining the flag, patrolling is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the tutorial before making your decision. If you choose to apply, you can drop an application over at WP:PERM/NPR.

Cheers, and hope to see you around, —  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)  21:23, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

BNY Mellon headquarters
Hello, Y2kcrazyjoker4. Following up on your fix of the BNY Mellon infobox with regards to BNY Mellon's new headquarters, are you willing to update the article's Operations section? It currently says "As of October 2015, the group's American and global headquarters are located at 225 Liberty Street, as the former 1 Wall Street building was sold in 2014", which is obviously outdated. Of course, the problem is that there is not secondary sourcing that verifies the move. There is, however, this Wall Street Journal article that notes that BNY Mellon would move from Liberty Street to the new location (then addressed 101 Barclay St.) this summer. Curious what your thoughts are. I have a financial conflict of interest as I'm here on behalf of BNY Mellon as part of my work at Beutler Ink. I also left a request at Talk:The_Bank_of_New_York_Mellon. As I noted there: I'm happy to come back later with a request once there's sourcing, if that's preferred, or if it's better to update now so that there's no confusion, I wonder if you'd be comfortable making the edit based on the WSJ source. Thank you in advance, Danilo Two (talk) 14:10, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
 * BNYM's corporate website now lists 240 Greenwich St as its HQ, so I can add that as a reference. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 01:46, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi there. That sounds fine to me if you think that the BNY Mellon website can be used as a source for this information. If you don't mind, could you update the Operations section if you get a chance? Because of my conflict of interest, I do not edit articles directly. Thanks again, Danilo Two (talk) 20:21, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

U2
FYI, I have taken the "repeal the eighth" issue to the talk page relating to the U2 article, and I mentioned your name. SunCrow (talk) 20:31, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Youngblood (5 Seconds of Summer album)
Hi Y2kcrazyjoker4. I pointed that Billboard "shows growth in the band's pop-rock sound" and Allmusic "dance-pop sound" doesn't mean the album is pop rock and dance-pop. But that creepy Bowling restored. "Musical sound" means any tone with characteristics such as controlled pitch and timbre. The sounds are produced by instruments in which the periodic vibrations can be controlled by the performer. 183.171.123.203 (talk) 18:40, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * use the mobile device can't able to see your own user talk page. I guess. 183.171.122.63 (talk) 18:09, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Experience + Innocence tour page
Hi. Yes, by all means add more material to my sandbox page. I started putting it together thinking that it was about time the EI tour page was something more than just a redirect but wasn't sure how much material I should add before publishing. I'm adding bits as and when I find them but if you have more content ready to be added, go ahead. Thanks! Muttleee (talk) 00:41, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I can submit for review if you like but I would feel a bit guilty since you did most of the work..! Excellent job, btw! I'm fairly new to publishing articles so am not familiar with the process. I read somewhere that there's a big backlog of articles awaiting review so the best thing to do was just go ahead and publish, since new articles will be updated by other users anyway. I don't know if that's really a good idea or not..? I was originally just planning to add content to the actual Experience and Innocence tour page and remove the redirect on it so that it becomes 'live'. I did this once before with just some headings but that edit was reversed due to not having any cited content etc. at the time. I had assumed that I and others would add to the page as time went on. Happy to take your guidance on this..? Muttleee (talk) 17:03, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Unsourced, undiscussed, unexplained GWAR
Really. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 14:39, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Where is there a single citation for any of those genres?? Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 16:52, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Three options: Provide a source, discuss the issue or explain the change. Did you do any one of those? - Sum mer PhD v2.0 23:42, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Red Pill Blues
Hi Y2kcrazyjoker4. If Pitchfork describes "their sixth album of smooth, professional, antiseptic soft-rock" and "Soft rock and sex have a tricky relationship" and then says that the overall album shows up on the song (especially refers to "Best 4 U"), it appears a good source supporting the soft rock genre. However none of this review set an explicit genre for the album as I would not consider that all songs are soft rock. It's like soft rock a radio format related to pop, rock and jazz. 183.171.120.167 (talk) 12:15, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

File:U2 Experience and Innocence Tour poster.jpg
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:16, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

October 2018 - edit warring
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Sergecross73  msg me  15:15, 25 October 2018 (UTC)


 * You’ve reverted at least 3 times now, and at least once since I’ve opened a talk page discussion that you’ve yet to contribute to. Please follow the basics and engage in discussion to get a consensus rather than just continually reverting. Sergecross73   msg me  15:15, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

"Contemporary"
"Contemporary" is used in the sense of belonging to the same period as the topic, in this case, Boy. It appears used this way in academic sources; "Contemporary reviews" of.... The Oxford dictionary cites this as the primary definition as well. I've seen it throughout the GA and FA-class Beatles articles here, although it was complemented with a "Retrospective appraisal" section in those articles, perhaps offering a greater distinction--would you consider this titling for the two sections in Boy? I don't much mind your previous change back to "Reception", but the ratings template does still say "Contemporary". Dan56 (talk) 22:34, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 * The use of contemporary I've seen is usually when already talking in past tense and speaking of someone's contemporaries. I think the naming of the section as "Reception" and "Legacy" is fine, as a reader would reasonably expect the former to be about reviews at the time or release and the latter to be framed from the time after release and beyond. You're right though, we should change the names of the template boxes themselves, though, to match. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 07:05, 19 November 2018 (UTC)