User talk:DKSN123

Your submission at Articles for creation: Small World (Metronomy album) (December 17)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This draft does not appear to indicate which of the musical notability criteria is satisfied. If at least one of the criteria is satisfied, please revise this draft appropriately, with a reliable source, if necessary stating on the talk page which criterion is met, and resubmit.

You may ask for advice about the musical notability criteria at the Teahouse.

This is an unreleased album, and does not satisfy general notability or musical notability. Please resubmit when the album is released, with reception information (e.g., charting).

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Small World (Metronomy album) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Small World (Metronomy album), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 06:01, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Darksnapper! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Robert McClenon (talk) 06:01, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Small World (Metronomy album) (February 20)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

The album does not appear at this time to have been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works (album criterion 1), and has not been released long enough to have charted (album criterion 2). Please wait to see how the album charts in the next week or so, and resubmit with charting.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Small World (Metronomy album) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Small World (Metronomy album), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 01:03, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Small World (Metronomy album).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Small World (Metronomy album).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) 18:47, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Darksnapper. Non-free files like File:Small World (Metronomy album).jpg can only be used in the article namespace per non-free content use criteria #9. This is why JJMC89 bot keeps removing the file from Draft:Small World (Metronomy album). The bot will continue to remove the file each time you re-add as long as that page is still a draft. Please re-add the file after the draft has been approved as an article as explained in WP:DRAFTS#Preparing drafts. If the file happens to be deleted per speedy deletion criteria F5 before the draft is approved, don't worry; an administrator can easily restore the file per WP:REFUND. It's OK if you weren't aware of relevant Wikipedia policy regarding non-free content use, but the bot will keep removing the file if you continue to re-add to the draft. If this process is repeated too many times, the administrator who runs that particular bot will likely notice and may decide to more formally warn you to stop or simply WP:BLOCK your account without warning. Neither of those things will happen as long as you wait until the draft has been approved before re-adding the file. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:06, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Small World (Metronomy album).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Small World (Metronomy album).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) 18:50, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Small World (Metronomy album) has been accepted

Small World (Metronomy album), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Ts12rAc^{talk to me} 09:36, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Eponymous

The issue is not whether the name of the album is eponymous. The issue is very bad writing style because it adds redundancy. If the title of the album and the name of the artist(s) are in the first sentence, that's all that is needed. "Eponymous" means "named for". It's unnecessary to say "Vampire Weekend is an album named for Vampire Weekend by Vampire Weekend". That kind of redundancy is poor writing, and adding it just creates a problem that others have to fix. I understand that it is often added to articles, but most of the time it is done incorrectly and then copied from one article to another. Do not add the word "eponymous" if the title of the album and the name of the artist(s) are in the first sentence. Please don't revert again before carefully reading WP:BRD. When someone removes something from an article for good reason that is explained in an edit summary, it is inappropriate for you to revert it back without first discussing and getting consensus on the article's talk page. That is disruptive editing. If it happens repeatedly it can result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you.

Hello. I apologize for reverting your edit on the page, and I understand your point. I have seen many album pages on this website using the word while mentioning the album. Thank you for your clarification.Darksnapper (talk) 01:56, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Views/Day	Title	Tagged with…
2	One with the Sun (talk)	Add sources
38	Windows NT booting process (talk)	Add sources
215	PEGI (talk)	Add sources
179	Kendrick Lamar (EP) (talk)	Add sources
26	Free look (talk)	Add sources
154	All the Stars (talk)	Add sources
19,970	Abortion law (talk)	Cleanup
269	Game controller (talk)	Cleanup
32	Computer-mediated reality (talk)	Cleanup
386	Mike Will Made It (talk)	Expand
41,956	2022 in film (talk)	Expand
78	C4 (mixtape) (talk)	Expand
2,563	SoundCloud (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
42	Homebuilt computer (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
119	Num Lock (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
243	Xbox system software (talk)	Merge
87	Game testing (talk)	Merge
1,286	Dessert (talk)	Merge
926	Keemstar (talk)	Wikify
166	Gamepad (talk)	Wikify
19	Wizzit (talk)	Wikify
19	JobTeaser (talk)	Orphan
9	Conversable (talk)	Orphan
8	Alex Mengel (talk)	Orphan
11	Universomo (talk)	Stub
9	East Central Independent School District (talk)	Stub
78	Jack Jones (American football) (talk)	Stub
3	Grenadine Records (talk)	Stub
76	NetEase Cloud Music (talk)	Stub
21	Be Here Soon (iamamiwhoami album) (talk)	Stub

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 20:18, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Greenlight (financial technology company) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Greenlight (financial technology company) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greenlight (financial technology company) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:25, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stylisation was added then removed, so please follow WP:BRD

Regarding your edit restoring the stylisation note to Emails I Can't Send here, firstly, I don't know how you managed to mess up the first two edits, but the note should not have been added back by you or any other editor per WP:BRD. It was first added, then I removed it, so if anybody wanted to restore it, a discussion should be had at the article talk page per BRD. Even if not intentional, this is part of edit warring. It also seems you misunderstood the comment I left there: My comment did not imply MOS:CAPS explicitly states "stylisations are trivial", but it does explicitly note how to capitalise titles, and tells us in other sections, "Do not mimic trademark stylization otherwise", "Avoid writing with all caps (all capital letters), including small caps (all caps at a reduced size), when they have only a stylistic function. Reduce them to title case, sentence case, or normal case, as appropriate." As from these examples it repeats how we should standardise text and remove the stylisations from encyclopedic text, any notes pointing out the contrary are therefore trivial and do not need to be noted. I also never claimed MOS:CAPS said it's not "consistently rendered in every source", as you somehow seemed to interpret I meant. I was talking about the album title not being rendered in lowercase letters in every media source talking about Carpenter's album, which it's not—you can see that for yourself if you take the time to look at them. Again, please don't restore trivial stylisation notes, and don't disregard WP:BRD intentionally or otherwise.

If you restore the note again, I will get an administrator involved, because now that you've been asked not to, that will be clear-cut edit warring. No administrator I've spoken to thinks stylisation notes in parentheses that interrupt the flow of prose at the start of an article are important, so you'll have a hard time convincing most sensible editors it is. Thank you. Ss112 12:39, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I know this reply is like 2 weeks late but I would like to point out that the article Bad Guy (Billie Eilish song) has a note right next to the title name at the start of the article which states that the song's title is stylized in all lowercase, and it has been listed as one of the Music good articles. There are also sources that ignore its stylization ([1] [2]). The note does not mimic the stylization but explains how it is stylized, and nothing on MOS:CAPS, the source you stated prevents the use of notes to provide information on the stylization of the title. The opinion of an administrator also does not affect Wikipedia guidelines unless the guidelines are actually changed. I would also like to speak about the way you worded your response, with you saying that I "messed up" my edits, and then you alluded to me not being a "sensible editor" at the end of your response, and although you have done a lot of work here, I ask that you treat editors with more respect as a result, although not expected. dksn123 (talk) 17:12, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And you'll find that in my message I told you I'm well aware MOS:CAPS does not prevent the use of a note—I said it still repeats how we should standardise text and remove the stylisations from encyclopedic text and thus any note to the contrary is trivial because it cannot be printed anywhere else in prose on Wikipedia anyway, and most importantly, it doesn't recommend we replicate such stylisations anywhere. I don't care what other articles do—I have no obligation to remove parenthetical notes from every article, but it should probably be removed from those too. As for The opinion of an administrator also does not affect Wikipedia guidelines, I never said it did. I don't think you read my message very clearly. I told you if you disregarded BRD by restoring the note I would get an admin involved. That has nothing to do with the admin's opinion on stylisation guidelines, so how you interpreted that as meaning "I will sic an admin on you to back up my opinion that notes are trivial" I don't know. Admins care moreso about preventing disruption and edit warring than the details of content disputes between editors. I don't know why you or any editor cares so much about restoring parenthetical notes that disrupt the flow of prose and are a mere footnote in the scheme of things. There are far more important things on this website to dispute and worry about. Ss112 01:30, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

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) 01:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

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) 00:57, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Playboi Carti, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Please check the previous edit note here. EphemeralPerpetuals (they/them) (talk) 01:15, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024 - Edit to Playboi Carti

Hey there @DKSN123, I just wanted to let you know that I reverted your edit to Playboi Carti's page as you swapped out a reliable news/blog source with a less reliable Tweet. Be sure to give WP:VERIFY a quick read over if you have doubts about sources in future, or create a topic over at Talk:Playboi Carti if you have any doubts.

Thanks, EphemeralPerpetuals (they/them)^talk 02:52, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited FaZe Clan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gaming. 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) 07:54, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]