User talk:Dancer73

Repost of Category:Pop rap albums[edit]

A tag has been placed on Category:Pop rap albums requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, because it appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion process. If you can indicate how it is different from the previously posted material, place the template {{hangon}} underneath the other template on the article and put a note on the page's discussion page saying why this article should stay. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please contact the administrator who deleted the page or use deletion review instead of continuing to recreate the page. Thank you. — ξ ^xplicit 23:59, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:BS circus Tour.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:BS circus Tour.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. ww2censor (talk) 04:51, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Genre[edit]

You may want to read User:Realist2/Genre Warrior, User:WesleyDodds/tempwork2 as well as a variety of archived discussion on genres seen here.

In a nut shell, a majority of editor that edit music articles do so from a original point of view rather than using WP:RELIABLE SOURCES that specialize in analyzing music. Ex: Allmusic, NME, Rolling Stone, Q magazine, Blender magazine/ major newspapers such as Los Angeles Times and The New York Times (among others) that have professional music critics, or the wide variety of music encyclopedias you can access on google books.

Template:Music_artist states: Aim for generality (e.g. Hip hop rather than East Coast hip hop). A wide variety of artists nowadays use an infinite number of genres, but they nonetheless have one or two genres they are primarily classified under. The infobox is not meant to be an extensive list of every genre the artist has ever experimented with, but their most general category.

For example: sythpop, dance-pop, electropop, pop-rock, etc, are all sub categories of pop music. If an artist uses all of these, simply link the infobox to pop. Alternative, new wave, symphonic, etc are all sub categories of rock. If an artist uses all of these, its best simply to link to rock. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 01:14, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

February 2010[edit]

Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Honorific nicknames in popular music, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Rodhull andemu 19:11, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to Southern Baptist Convention. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Ham tech person 19:37, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello![edit]

We have a small problem with some of your recent changes that you have made to many Genres in artist and album articles. This changes your are making are something that has long ago been decided, however this does not mean a change can cant change , but it must be talked about on the pages talk page!!... Moxy (talk) 02:09, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

June 2010[edit]

Please do not add or change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to Rockstar 101. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Changing genres without sources or discussion can be upsetting to many editors. Please be sure to have reliable sources when making such changes. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 09:36, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Genres—final warning[edit]

This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits.
The next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Genres need to be sourced. Please review our verifiability policy and citing sources guideline, as well as an essay regarding genre warring. — ξ ^xplicit 03:02, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing, for a period of 72 hours, for continued addition and altering genres without providing sources or discussing the matter on the talk page of the articles. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. — ξ ^xplicit 19:26, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Genres, seriously[edit]

Please stop adding or changing genres from articles without citing sources. Your edits are problematic as they constitute as original research, and your continued behavior—despite several prior warnings and a three-day block—is disruptive behavior. If you insist in adding or changing genres, provide sources, as I said, or discuss the issue on the talk page of the article in concern. You will receive another, lengthier block should you continue with your characteristic and problematic editing pattern. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me. Again, consider this your only warning. — ξ ^xplicit 05:53, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

August 2010[edit]

Please do not add or change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to Rockstar 101. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Please stop changing the genres without reliable sources (or even an explanation). — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 22:19, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to Rated R (Rihanna album). Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Genre warring is a good way to get yourself blocked, as you have already seen. Stop now. Thanks. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 22:24, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:13, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

January 2017[edit]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to change genres without discussion or sources, as you did at No Doubt (702 album) ‎, you may be blocked from editing. Additionally, on Star (702 album) you added three genres, citing a source which mentioned one of the three. SummerPhD^v2.0 15:20, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Gotta Leave) has been reviewed![edit]

Thanks for creating Gotta Leave, Dancer73!

Wikipedia editor Nick Moyes just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Please correct the link in the lead to 702 I.e. the group, not the year), and add at least one supporting reference to prove notabiity in reaching the billboard chart.

To reply, leave a comment on Nick Moyes's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Nick Moyes (talk) 10:13, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of You Don't Know (702 song) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article You Don't Know (702 song) 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/You Don't Know (702 song) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Derek Andrews (talk) 23:24, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

August 2017[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. 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: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Alex Shih ^Talk 06:43, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Vanamonde (talk) 14:04, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

July 2018[edit]

Hello, I'm Hulmem. I noticed that you made one or more changes to an article, TLC (group), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. hulmem (talk) 14:21, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 2018[edit]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you change genres in pages without discussion or sources, as you did at Blaque Out. Binksternet (talk) 05:51, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Dancer73. 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]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Dancer73. 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]

December 2018[edit]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you change genres in pages without discussion or sources, as you did at Talk About Our Love. You don't seem to be getting the message. I'm not sure whether you need a long block or an indefinite one, but please realize one or the other will likely occur if you continue. SummerPhD^v2.0 22:27, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation[edit]

An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dancer73, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

SummerPhD^v2.0 21:01, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Materialscientist (talk) 23:00, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]