Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

Hello Sbb618. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Triple Crown of Acting".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Draft:Triple Crown of Acting}}, paste it in the edit box at , click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 14:21, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, the page will require a re-working! I'll take a look and a stab at it at some point in the next few days! Therequiembellishere (talk) 21:08, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of people who have won Academy, Emmy, Grammy, and Tony Awards, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thriller. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:44, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

—delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Imzadi1979 on 01:04, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sbb618. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Grammy Award records, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Hanes (check to confirm | 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) 10:21, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of oldest and youngest Academy Award winners and nominees, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Darkest Hour (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:44, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited United States order of precedence, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Daniel Walsh (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sbb618. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Grammy Award records, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sting (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:15, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Academy Award-winning families, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marriage Story (check to confirm | 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) 09:34, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Trolls World Tour (soundtrack), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Richard Stannard (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 13:40, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Teaches me to read quickly.. did not notice "Album of the Year".. just went with the age. Good catch!--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 23:20, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited United States order of precedence, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John McEntee (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:50, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Savage Mode II, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Luis Resto.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:45, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sbb618! This is just a notification/reminder that I have asked on the talk page of Seniority in the United States House of Representatives whether there are any objections to a proposed change for one of the sections. It will be much appreciated if you could give your opinion on the matter. Absent any objections a week from now, I will carry out the edit.

Sdrqaz (talk) 20:18, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your edit here, you said that Billboard published a list earlier this year listing all the non-English songs to hit the top 10 on the Hot 100. Do you have the source? Someone has just restored "I Like It" to that list of non-English number ones. MPFitz1968 (talk) 23:02, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, here it is. It's paywalled, but here's a quote: "Notably, the 20 top 10s below are sung entirely or mainly in a language other than English; the list does not include songs with portions in other languages, such as "Enrique Iglesias' "Bailamos" or Cardi B, Bad Bunny and J Balvin's "I Like It."" Sbb618 (talk) 01:15, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:32, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can't believe you beat me to adding the 117th Congress to Seniority in the United States House of Representatives: I've been working on a list since October in my sandbox! I was just waiting for IA-02 and NY-22 to be fully resolved before publishing.

Sdrqaz (talk) 23:14, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, sorry. I've been holding onto that for a version of that for a while (can't remember when I started, but at least a month) and wanted to get it off my plate. Sbb618 (talk) 00:06, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for correcting my formatting error. JTRH (talk) 17:27, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe add the Weeknd in the consecutive weeks in top ten column. Dramatised X (talk) 18:19, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Only had 41 consecutive weeks in the top 10, because Christmas songs pushed him out for a short bit. Sbb618 (talk) 21:08, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Exodus (DMX album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page DMX.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sbb618, here is a link to support my claim that Justin Bieber has accumulated 280 weeks in the top 10 of the Hot 100 for the chart dated October 2, 2021. Billboard tweeted soon after the Hot 100 was announced for the chart dated August 14, 2021. Kindly update the list. Thanks --Beemer03 (talk) 15:44, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Billboard 200 number-one independent albums, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 25.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! In order to edit the French Wikipedia page of Beyoncé's new album Renaissance, I would like to know what source did you use to find all the credits of the tracklist. Thank you for your answer LISONJES (talk) 11:54, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit here was reverted on the account that you didn't provide a reliable source. I am assuming that you used the information leaved on Twitter which is now being reported by lots of outlets. This could be real (it probably is) but it cannot be verified yet. So please do not add to the article again. Also some of the ways that the artists were credited was incorrect. >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 12:30, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to misunderstand how wikipedia and our credits work. We listed them how they are credited in the medium provided. If Beyonce lists herself as Beyoncé Gizelle Knowles (using her middle name) or Beyoncé Knowles-Carter, then that is how we list is regardless of how its been done previously. This is because it makes attribution to the reliable source much easier to do. I'm sorry if you don't like that - take it to the talkpage and discuss per WP:BRD or risk being blocked or banned. You were bold in your edit, but then you were reverted. Per the guideline, you need to now discuss and again consensus for your edit(s) BEFORE adding them back in. >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 17:31, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lil-unique1, it doesn't matter how the credits are presented. The point of listing credits on Wikipedia is to take the information given and list it in a standardized manner to make it easy to understand. The medium provided lists the full name every time, but we just do last name after first mention. Why? Because it's clearer and not repetitive. It doesn't matter if whoever puts together Apple Music lists a writer as a stage name or not, songwriting credits use their legal name and will be shown as such. I find it ironic that you threaten me with disruptive editing practices when you're the one who knowingly deletes important and properly formatted information from the article in the name of incorrectly applied "rules". The album style page lists as literally the first line, "The standard method of attributing writers is to write (and link) the full name the first time it appears". NOWHERE does it mention anything about common name, something that you are pulling out of thin air. I will be reinstating my edits to the tracklist, which follow standard guidelines which seem to be agreed on everyone across Wikipedia except you. Sbb618 (talk) 23:45, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sbb618 You have 100% misunderstood me. I understand you're trying to minimise confusion because you think people haven't heard of Terius Gesteelde-Diamant so they're going to wonder who that is etc. but that's what piping links are for and exactly why we have to follow the name used in the credits otherwise things don't match the sources. In no way was i suggesting we have to write Terius Gesteelde-Diamant everytime the The-Dream wrote as a song on the album. Nowhere have I said list out everyone's first and second name all the time. All I did is replace things like Terius Nash with Terius Gesteelde-Diamant because that's how The-Dream's name has been creditedon this release. Nowhere have I edited or spelled out everyone full name all the time. I haven't threatened you or pulled anything out of thin are. I asked you to discuss and gain a consensus for using Terius Nash (and others who have been credited like that) where they have been listed differently in the album credits. You have literally made stuff up out of thin are because WP:IDONTLIKEIT and you've engaged in an edit war, ignoring WP:BRD. You started the cycled by making a bold edit, you were reverted by me therefore it is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO GET A CONSENSUS. I haven't suggested anything that what it says at Album style. I literally did what it said. There is no rule or policy which says we have to use legal name for writing, stage name for production. That is usually how credits are given yes, The-Dream has changed his legal name recently. All your doing now is perpetuating an edit war. Honestly, there's no need to be so rude and passive aggressive. I'm not saying I'm a better editor than you but I have edited wikipedia since 2009 and we always go off how the credits are displayed in the source used for them otherwise people challenged them or get confused. Either way, I assume you are going to ignore all reason and do what you want. I won't revert- however upon release of the album we will list the credits how they are in the album booklet in terms of what names people use and then crediting their surname in subsequent mentions, as we have always done. So then if people like The-Dream are listed as writers as Terius Gesteelde-Diamant and you want to change it to Terius Nash you will have to take this up on the talkpage. In the meantime, I'd suggest you learn about WP:EDITWAR, WP:BRD and assume good faith and I mean that politely. BRD applies to everyone even if you think you are right. When you edit something and its reverted the owness is on you to find support for your edit. >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 00:07, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lil-unique1 There is no Terius Gesteelde-Diamant. The-Dream has not legally changed his name per any source on Wikipedia or otherwise. He holds a trademark on the phrase and nothing else. The name "Gesteelde-Diamant" is not mentioned in a single source that is not reprinting these credits verbatim. Wikipedia's page on The-Dream does not once mention the words "Gesteelde-Diamant". Apple Music credits are not an official source in any way as per naming, they are just in use because album booklets and liner notes are not publicly available. On the official ASCAP publishing credits, his name is listed as "Terius Youngdell Nash". https://www.ascap.com/repertory#/ace/search/title/Break%20My%20Soul/performer/Beyonce?at=false&searchFilter=SVW&page=1. I find it ludicrous that you are accusing me of passive-agressive behavior when your actions in this dispute are looked at for even a second. Don't try and pull rank on me, I have been adding credits to albums for years in this way because this is the format they are written in on Wikipedia. You're the one who took this to my talk page for no reason. You're the one who made the bold edit of jumping to secondary credits and completely reinterpreting Wikipedia guidelines instead of just USING THE PERSON'S NAME. There was no edit war until you decided to enforce your idea of what this should be. I did the due diligence of adding the credits in myself in a clear and concise format in the first place, you were the one who decided to stick to overspecific guidelines you created yourself. And for future reference, the word is "onus". Sbb618 (talk) 00:29, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sbb618 Again, I'm going to try and explain politely why we should credit exactly how they are given in the album booklet (when it comes out) or whatever the final version of the credits are. A musician can have multiple ways of being credited. Warren "Oak" Felder is a good example. His legal name is Warren Felder, he is credited in all manner of ways across his released including Oak_wud, Oak Felder and just Oak. Rather than pick a style, wikipedia has never just made up a rule. There is nowhere it says "legal name for writing, stage name for credits". This has become established practice because this is generally how credits are presented. In 95% of cases, album credits use their legal name for writing and a stage name for production. This is the industry need to know who to pay the royalties to. Now what's more confusing? For wikipedia to choose to credit someone if they don't want to be credited that way or to use however they've chosen to be credited because that is what makes attribution to the source easier? I wasn't trying to pull rank at all, nor was I creating overspecific guidelines. If we follow WP:V and WP:RS all information should be reliably sourced. Nowhere does wikipedia mandate us to use a specific name for an individual who goes by multiple names. The-Dream does use Gesteelde-Diamant on his social media profile to be fair as seen here, though he does replace Terius with T'Adamu. The first edit was you changing the information - I reverted it. The edit war begins when you undo my revert. Regardless of who is being bold (or who you think is being bold), at the point you have been reverted if you wish to change back then the onus (thanks for the correction) is on yourself. Anyway, that's the clearest I can be. If when the album comes out things like The-Dream being credited as Terius Gesteelde-Diamant, the discuss will be revisited. I was merely pointing out that from my years of experience and good articles, for source attribution, you always go by what the source says especially as things like names change over time. I hope we can reach a consensus to try and politely resolve this without feeling like we're gunning for each other. I reached out to you to discuss it because you broke WP:BRD and rather than continuously disrupt the article with multiple reversions I thought we should try and discuss. (also removed the outdent comment) >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 00:44, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lil-unique1 I don't know how much clearer things can get than the line I quoted earlier from WP:TRACKLIST: "The standard method of attributing writers is to write (and link) the full name the first time it appears, and then just give the last name". A stage name is not a full name. A nickname is not a full name. A social media handle, like the one seen on Brittany Coney's credit in the source used, is especially not a full name. Beyoncé conveniently publishes full album liner notes on her website, so when the album is released we can refer to those, but for the time being we follow the guidelines as best we can, and don't just resort to copying second-party information verbatim. And even those liner notes aren't completely guaranteed: even with Beyoncé, Dangerously in Love includes three songs co-written by Three Times Dope member Robert Waller, as it is spelled in most sources, including the ASCAP/BMI database, but the album credits list Robert Walker. We take the information available to us, interpret it as best we can, and present that to the general audience of Wikipedia. Sometimes names in commonly-used credit sources like Tidal are presented in all caps for no real reason, seemingly at random. Do we write them as such on their Wikipedia page? No, because we know well enough that that isn't how it is meant to be. The name "T'Adamu Gesteelde-Diamant" does not turn up one single Google hit besides his own Instagram page, and when looking before the release of Beyoncés latest single, neither does "Terius Gesteelde-Diamant". It doesn't matter if Elton John and Bernie Taupin decide to write their credits on "Don't Go Breakin' My Heart" as "Ann Orson" and "Carte Blanche", or someone decided to present it that way for them, the writers of that song are Elton John and Bernie Taupin and we should present those facts. And as for WP:BOLD, I would argue that the first edit was on your end. I added the entire information to begin with and you were the one who changed it to fit your guidelines. I was just reverting your edit of my initial addition, and you should be the one to have justified that edit in the first place. I don't know why you're insisting on following Apple Music's internal credits to the letter but also trying to take the lead artist's name and credit on every song and put it in a separate place apart from all the others, and I'm not sure why you decided this specifically needed to be the thing you were going to defend for more than a day at this point. Sbb618 (talk) 02:50, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I moved Beyonce out of the track listing was because she's on every song and the track listing is already very crowded especially for those on small devices and screens. Its called sensible and there's a precedence for this. I know it might be different to a lot of articles that you have come across but its certainly not as radical as you're making out nor is it "against the rules". WP:TRACKLISTING even demonstrates this as an example and so does the template for track listing when one person has credits on every song. You are making an interpretation of the words The standard method of attributing writers is to write (and link) the full name the first time it appears, and then just give the last name based on your personal understanding or view not what is actually written. Nowhere does it say that if the full name given in the source is different to the full name listed on their wikipedia page, or if different names are used or if multiple names exist but its the same person etc. Attribution back to the source is always the most important thing. I will agree with you that we will go off the final credits when they're out and its pointless arguing over information that is not 100 percent confirmed yet. For the record, Wikipedia is not a legal record of royalities - we're not obliged to go with legal and stage names. WP:COMMONNAME which is our title policy for pages say we go off the name of a topic based on what they are commonly known as or by what the most credible/common sources say. If ultimately Terius is credited as Terius Gesteelde-Diamant in the album credits we should use that, this is what piping is for. I am defending this point of view because it is correct (in my humble opinion) and I believe we will collectively agree with this when the album comes out (I expect). Other stuff existing a certain way is a shaky argument because I could pull out plenty of examples where what you say isn't the case too but lets revisit when the album comes out. >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 10:39, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The way National Wild and Scenic Rivers fit into the National Park System can be weird, but I found that the (Upper) Saint Croix was designated a Scenic Riverway in 1968. The NPS managed it as a Riverway unit, and in 1972 Congress named the Lower portion a Scenic Riverway to also be administed by the Secretary of the Interior. The NPS decided to just add the new portion to the management of the original rather than as a separate unit but for some reason the area is still reported separately. See [1][2][3]. Reywas92^Talk 04:41, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:09, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I appreciate you filling out the writers on Bebe (album), but please see WP:NOTBROKEN. Redirects don't need to be "fixed" as they are not broken. There is nobody else Calvin Broadus refers to other than Snoop Dogg, so there's no need to pipe the link to Snoop Dogg directly. Same with several other examples. Also consider not linking pages that tell us nothing about a person just because they redirect there. The Songland article tells us next to nothing about the songwriters who featured on it, so it's really not a useful link. This is why I didn't do these things in the first place, and I'd encourage you to take this on board in regards to your edits in future. Thank you. Ss112 09:18, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[Ss112], thanks for reaching out. I generally believe that credits like these should provide as much useful info as they can. Even if a link will redirect to the common name of the person, most people scrolling through the discography aren't going to click on every unfamiliar name, but a lot of people will mouse over the link and be able to see who it leads to. That's important information, extremely relevant to the topic at hand, that we shouldn't intentionally not convey or add an extra step to. In that WP:NOTBROKEN heading, one of the possible given reasons for bypassing redirects is "It may be appropriate to make this kind of change if the hint or tooltip that appears when a user hovers over the link is misleading (see Principle of least astonishment)", and in my view that applies here.

For the Songland examples, I just saw it linked there already for one writer and added it to another when I saw they were on the show as well. Sbb618 (talk) 14:30, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Billboard 200, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "missing periodical" error. References show this error when the name of the magazine or journal is not given. Please edit the article to add the name of the magazine/journal to the reference, or use a different citation template. ( | )

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 06:00, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

—delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Imzadi 1979 → on 19:00, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thanks for adding the credits to Pink Friday 2, but please see WP:NOTBROKEN. Redirects are not broken and there's no need to always avoid them. There's no reason to avoid that amount of redirects by piping artists' real names to their better-known stage names. Thanks. Ss112 06:08, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I left my view in the edit message, but I think this line in WP:NOTBROKEN applies: "It may be appropriate to make this kind of change if the hint or tooltip that appears when a user hovers over the link is misleading (see Principle of least astonishment)." You're adding needless complexity and extra steps to the sole purpose of the page, which is "telling people who wrote this song". Without a redirect, hovering over "Jacques Webster" or "Lukasz Gottwald" tells you nothing about some of the most famous and successful musicians in the world, and you are making a conscious choice to obfuscate that in the name of how you read Wikipedia rules and guidelines instead of an effort to be helpful. I know this sounds meaner than I intend it to be, but I really believe this is the best way to get as much important information across in this format as possible. Sbb618 (talk) 06:12, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Hovering" over links only works on desktop, whereas most Wikipedia readers are on mobile nowadays, so that argument falls flat for most of our readers. How is removing information adding needless complexity? It's making it less complex. If we followed that exception, Sbb618, nobody would ever utilise redirects, but we should. Do you feel the need to always avoid linking to redirects? Also, everybody knows Deborah Harry is Debbie Harry, same with longer names like Donald Cannon obviously being Don Cannon and so on—you even undid those. If you are so opposed to linking to people's real names, use their stage names against the general guideline that we should use real names for writing credits. Also, hold on: how is somebody's real name misleading? It's their real name, which you've used in the pipe. Desktop users hovering over a link to Lukasz Gottwald would absolutely expect to see a link to Lukasz Gottwald, not necessarily Dr. Luke nor do they need to know from the link that that is Dr. Luke if they don't already. They can click on it if they don't know—that is why links exist. That exception in NOTBROKEN really is clearly talking about WP:EASTEREGG links. Ss112 06:20, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, we don't have to worry about sentence flow or anything, this is only concerning a straight list of names. And why go and mobile over desktop when piping the links is a positive outcome for both sets? I'm coming at this from more a "how will the user actually experience this" viewpoint than a strictly principled one, so while it adds "complexity" using the more literal meaning "a more complex page under the hood", it's a smoother and more direct way of getting the user to the information they want by starting to open the link. It's important enough to be singled out as an exception in the rule you cite!

For stage names, I don't really know, I've been adding credits to new albums for a while and I've just been following that as a guideline to standardize everything: the Wikipedia rules for album credits aren't really built for works with dozens of different writers using different name formats with different contributions. I think it provides for a way to both reflect how writing credits are formally written out (this is an encyclopedia, after all) and provide useful context to those names within that structure, plus it's useful to not have to check if a redirect exists for every single given name when I can just plug in the more famous variant, but if there's a consensus against it it's something I could be convinced to go the other way on. Sbb618 (talk) 06:40, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've just made sure the redirects exist by creating several. As I just said, it's an exception in NOTBROKEN for when a reader might be surprised or misled by what they see if they hover on desktop/press and hold the link on mobile (which takes a second and I don't think a lot of our mobile readers do). Readers are not going to be surprised to see a link to Lukasz Gottwald while hovering over Lukasz Gottwald. A lot of these songwriters have producer credits and their stage names are covered there, which is a large part of why I don't think we should mind linking to redirects. I'd be willing to compromise on that maybe some of the more obscure rapper names who aren't producers could be piped (Symere Woods and the like), but I don't think Aubrey Graham and Onika Maraj are obscure "real names" to their fans, and the producers like Matthew Samuels being Boi-1da and Dr. Luke also having their real names on the same line we don't need to pipe. Anyway, I'm saying all of this but somebody could just come along and re-pipe them later on down the line (I'm not going to be watching the page that closely after today) or remove all the pipes again. I don't know, it's just a proposition for now. Ss112 06:45, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]