This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of most watched television broadcasts in the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ABC ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver).

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:02, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

I haven't edited in a while. I came across your work on Mariah Carey's Tours page. I think you have done a great job and I personally thank you for your contributions to her pages. Cheers mate.-- PeterGriffin • Talk2Me 00:29, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

I Wish You Well! Heartfox ( talk) 23:00, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mariah Carey singles discography, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bow Wow ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver).

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:17, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Heartfox. 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)

Please don't make edits like this, removing a valid and big record market like Canada to replace with Korea just so you can add sales. — IB ^{[ Poke ]} 09:51, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Due to your recent removal of content with a list-defined reference at Mariah Carey, with this edit, you created another cite error seen in the references section: Cite error: A list-defined reference named "BNPnL" is not used in the content (see the help page ). Please go back to the article and fix the cite error you created in a featured article. Using the show preview button and checking the references section helps prevent these common mistakes. Thanks.— Isaidnoway (talk) 20:39, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited American Ninja Warrior, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sasuke ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver).

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:41, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello. A renamer or clerk has responded to your username change request, but requires clarification before moving forward. Please follow up at your username change request entry as soon as possible. Thank you. ‐‐ 1997kB ( talk) 16:47, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Stop your disruptive editing, please. WP:OTHERCONTENT; Carey's singles discography is a featured list because of this version, see Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Mariah Carey singles discography/archive2. The numerical success of a recording is sometimes better explained in the text than in a table. Yeah, and this the case. You can't impose a drastic change in the format of the tables of the discographies, that's why I told you to discuss your changes on talk page per WP:CYCLE. If you want to compare a single's "sucess" then you can click on every song's page: the sales figures are better explained on the text than in a table. Best regards. -- Miaow 23:39, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello, there are already numerous lists (Taylor Swift, Katy Perry, Demi Lovato, etc.) which contain a sales figures column (that I have not added) for singles. None of these featured lists have been delisted or have had this column removed. Why? Because single sales are relevant. The only reason a single sales column is not in more singles discographies is because sales numbers are more often reported for albums rather than singles. However, since the digital era, many reliable sources like Billboard have been increasingly publishing digital sales figures for singles. These are "pure sales", not "sales units", just as are the sales figures in the album sales column. There isn't any confusion with regard to the type of sales mentioned. As such, the statement "the numerical success of a recording is sometimes better explained in the text than in a table" does not apply and is unnecessary. Again, these are simple digital sales figures—not some physical copy estimate from the 1970s or something. Furthermore, according to WP:DISCOGSTYLE, "information, data, and statistics may be included wherever available and applicable" per release. The requirements in the "Per-release" section refer to albums, singles, and music videos. The seventh requirement states that sales figures are expected (this applies to singles, as there is not a † symbol that says otherwise). This justifies the single sales column. Again, nowhere does it say it cannot be added. This is not a drastic change. It's just not normal because not every artist has their single sales figures reported as wholly as others. Thank you. Heartfox ( talk) 03:31, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

No. Again, WP:OTHERCONTENT: stop comparing articles, please. These days, some artists, maybe most of them, have better impact on streaming services than digital/physical copy, Grande is one of them, and the sales figures of her singles are better explained on the text, that's why this is the case. Next time you are involved in a edit war, you should stop your disruptive editing and seek consensus. Thank you. -- Miaow 14:33, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

I was comparing four of the same types of articles in telling you that adding something that's in them to another is not a "drastic change" to the 'format' like you said—the format already exists. I don't need consensus to add a singles sales column. There is no policy that says it cannot exist. In fact, the WP:DISCOGSTYLE actually requires adding sales figures for albums AND singles in discography tables. Again, it says "information, data, and statistics may be included wherever available and applicable" per release, and sales figures is the seventh requirement under this guideline. Why do you think Grande's single sales figures are better explained in text? Again, these are not sales units that are confusing because they're based on streaming numbers—they are pure sales figures (as are the album sales figures) and have been reported by reliable sources like Billboard. Billboard has reported sales figures for almost every one of Grande's major singles. Heartfox ( talk) 17:14, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

No, you have to seek consensus everytime a user disagrees with you. I'm giving you good advice here. These sales columns were added by an IP and new users. Stop comparing articles, focus on this page, that argument is invalid per WP:OTHERCONTENT. I already told you why in some cases sales figures are better explained in the text. Thank you. -- Miaow 18:27, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

You're the one who brought up that its not the "format" in the first place, and now you're telling me that I am breaking WP:OTHERCONTENT by telling you that the format already exists in other (featured) lists? Wow. Again, per WP:DISCOGSTYLE, sales figures for singles are one of the requirements for a discography table, and they may be added. Again, these sales figures are as SIMPLE as can be! Your argument that Grande's "sales figures are better explained in the text" has no merit. They are pure digital sales via Billboard. I don't understand what you're confused about. It doesn't matter if its a new user who makes an edit or an experienced user but anyways, the singles sales column for Mariah Carey was added by this user FYI. Heartfox ( talk) 18:51, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello Heartfox, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your additions to Kirk Franklin have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 03:17, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia... are you kidding me?! The photo is from a video that has a "Creative Commons Attribution license (reuse allowed)" listed at the bottom of the description and this is shown in the file description. There are MANY articles on Wikipedia that use photos from videos like this. This means that the video is under CC BY 3.0, meaning its contents HAVE "been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license." You know that users/organizations can license their videos on YouTube... not everything is copyrighted to the max, right? Heartfox ( talk) 03:39, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Template:FOXNetwork Shows (current and upcoming). Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:16, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

It wasn't even an unexplained removal. I wrote "Syndicated" for the edit summary as it is not a Fox broadcast show. How is that vandalism? The Real and The Wendy Williams Show also air on Fox affiliates, but they're not "Fox" shows. They're not owned by the network like Today or The View, for example. RuPaul belongs in the "Syndication" section of Template:U.S. daytime talk shows with other daytime syndicated shows, not Template:FOXNetwork Shows (current and upcoming). Heartfox ( talk) 17:16, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Saw you edit summary- there are 16 contestants in season 2, as shown through sources such as Entertainment Weekly and The Wrap. Magitroopa ( talk) 21:30, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

My apologies, hadn't seen the sources other than the Nick Cannon quote :) Heartfox ( talk) 21:31, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Also, on the table on the S2 page- I'm not 100% on the 'who's performing in the first episode'. I saw a post on Reddit showing people discussing these costumes being in the first group due to Wikipedia. However, I'm not entirely sure those would qualify as proof they are in the first episode. Only exceptions might be for Egg and Thingamajig, who state, "Crack the mystery in our Season 2 premiere," and, "Watch #ThingamajigMask in #TheMaskedSinger Season 2 premiere". For Eagle and Tree, sounds more like just advertising that they are new costumes in the new season rather than they are in the premiere. (Separate sentences like, "Watch the Season 2 premiere on...", instead of, "Watch Eagle in the Season 2 premiere on...") Just my thoughts. Magitroopa ( talk) 18:50, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. I saw the Reddit post yesterday too. We can Eagle and Tree off for now I guess. Heartfox ( talk) 20:26, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Just removed them off the table. And if you're curious, just saw some images going around. Apparently last 2 masks were revealed. We won't add them on until we have proper WP:RS for it, of course, but if you're curious, they seem to be here. Maybe(?) they'll be revealed in the super sneak peek special tonight. Magitroopa ( talk) 23:18, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Alright, so how are these episode working? The first two episode titles have been revealed as "Return of the Masks: Groups A & B" and "Return of the Masks: Group C". For "A & B" it says it is the first 8, while for "C" it says it is 4 new ones. That only adds up to 12, with 4 left. I'm assuming that means there will be a group D episode? If this is the case, then I assume we can now color the boxes tan for the 8 in the table that still list "TBD" for episode 1 since 8 have now been highlighted for performing in the first episode? Then we can probably also make the boxes tan for episode 2 of those performing in the first episode? See Zap2it in regards to the number of contestants for each episode. --- I don't know if any of that made sense (I tried my best), but see my sandbox for what I mean. Magitroopa ( talk) 23:54, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

I just noticed Zap2It (and the press releases ( which can be viewed here also)) refer to the two-hour premiere as Episode 1 and 2 separately. That means Group C is episode 3 and Group D is episode 4. But we don't know which 4 go in the first hour (episode 1) and which go in the second hour (episode 2) of the premiere. I edited the table on your sandbox to reflect what I believe is correct (to what we know), you can check it out. Heartfox ( talk) 00:23, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Yes, that will probably be best. I don't know if a separate sort of note list should be made as to who was in the Sept. 25 episode(s), but based on production codes, they are definitely two separate episodes ("MS-201/2"), but being combined as one 2-hour episodes as opposed to two 1-hour episodes with one following the other (as all sites are calling it "Groups A & B", other than Google, who calls it "Groups A & B Part 1" and "Groups A & B Part 2".)

Though, with that being the case, I think the table should still refer to the first 8 being in just episode 1 as opposed to the first 8 in episodes 1 and 2 (again, combined as one 2-hour episode) since that could cause confusion between the contestants/results chart and what is being listed in the ratings section. Might also be a good idea to get the production codes listed in the ratings table too. Magitroopa ( talk) 02:25, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

We could refer to the header on the contestant table as "Weeks" instead of "Episodes" to solve that I think! Heartfox ( talk) 02:34, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Please stop disrupting Mariah's SINGLES discography. The entire article took time and effort to update as RIAA did some major update TODAY !!!!!!!

Sorry I didn't mean to revert your edits. Heartfox ( talk) 02:03, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

What are you saying about my poster, I have a source for it. User:Sentai01 ( talk) 2:02 10 November 2019 UTC —Preceding undated comment added 03:42, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

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) 00:18, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Ordinarily I agree with most of your edits when I see them. But changing an image on a widely viewed page because it's "higher quality" when it's not even the same cover as the original nor the more widely recognised version of the cover is not a wise move. Please open a discussion at Talk:All I Want for Christmas Is You before changing it again. Thank you. Ss 112 17:59, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback, I appreciate it! Heartfox ( talk) 18:38, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Just earlier, you replaced several references the user T0mRiddlee added to several discographies. Please bear in mind that having publisher= in the same reference as work= is considered redundant per CS1 style/ Template:Cite web, and that Prometheus Global Media no longer publishes Billboard anyway (it's Eldridge Industries). Also, I might expect a newer editor like T0mRiddlee to be using the wrong date format, but I would think by this stage you would know to use the correct date format on articles. Harry Styles is British, so his articles use dmy date format. You copied the same reference around to at least three pages without changing "December 22, 2019" to "22 December 2019" on articles that use that format. Please check in future. Thanks. Ss 112 22:38, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Sorry about that. Heartfox ( talk) 23:01, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

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

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. 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 proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at The Masked Singer (American season 3). Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

This draft has been resubmitted without any visible improvement. If you do not know what is needed to improve this draft, please ask for advice at the Teahouse. If this draft is resubmitted without any improvement again, it may be Rejected, or may be nominated for deletion.

This draft has not been shown to satisfy television notability.

User:Rider0101, User:Magitroopa - You have already been advised that discussion of whether to split an article about the third season should be at the talk page of the series. There has not yet been discussion at the talk page of the series. (In my own opinion, an article on the third season, which has not yet started, although it is scheduled, is premature. However, you were told to discuss at the series talk page.) The resubmission of this draft before there has been discussion and before the season starts is disruptive. If the disruptive resubmission continues, it may be necessary to request a topic-ban on the resubmitters via a report at WP:ANI.

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:The Masked Singer (American season 3) 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:The Masked Singer (American season 3), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{ db-self}}" 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, 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) 06:32, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Heartfox! 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) 06:32, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by CatcherStorm was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

CatcherStorm ^talk 06:10, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Hey there, just saw your edit. I don't really go into images on Wikipedia that much, but the Smart Dog Media website might be helpful... Magitroopa ( talk) 02:13, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks!! The image upload process/template/wizard thing is a disaster in my opinion. It should really be improved. I just copy stuff from other images that have proper formatting lol. Heartfox ( talk) 02:17, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:The Masked Singer US S3.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) 03:37, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

With the recent moving of the Sing-Along special (from April 14 to 15), I think this can safely be updated now, in regards to season 3 weeks. I'm sure you'd do better at counting it than myself, but with at least one episode scheduled for every week until the season finale on May 27, I get a count of 17 weeks. Magitroopa ( talk) 06:28, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

WP:BOLD Heartfox ( talk) 06:14, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Gordon Ramsay's 24 Hours to Hell & Back logo.jpeg. 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) 17:44, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Heartfox! You created a thread called Is this image public domain? at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{ bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot ( talk) 19:01, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

You have comments from me on this nomination. SNUGGUMS ( talk / edits) 20:31, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Masked Singer US Costumes.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) 02:24, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Masked Singer (American TV series), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michelle Williams ( 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) 13:19, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Masked-singer-after-the-mask.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) 17:45, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Masked Singer (American TV series) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MonkeyStolen234 -- MonkeyStolen234 ( talk) 15:41, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

The article The Masked Singer (American TV series) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Masked Singer (American TV series) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MonkeyStolen234 -- MonkeyStolen234 ( talk) 20:41, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

This is not part of an album, it's a separate release. And there's plenty of sources calling it a single. It doesn't need a radio release. —  Status ( talk · contribs) 23:34, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello,

I noticed you undid my revisions to the Chromatica pages, notably that Sour Candy is an official single. As it stands, multiple sources have confirmed the song is a promotional single only. So far you have found one source you claim proves it is an official radio single in Australia, however this link is broken and leads no where. All versions of this link I have tried lead to saying the page does not exist. Therefore, for now, until you can find another source that proves Sour Candy as an official singe, through a link that works, the best course of action is to continue considering it a promotional single only. Best wishes -- BenBowser ( talk) 00:24, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

@ BenBowser: Please discuss on Talk:Chromatica, not here. I'm not the only one involved in these edits. Heartfox ( talk) 00:25, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Masked Singer US Monster Voiceover.ogg. 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) 17:33, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Masked Singer US Costumes Gallery.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) 18:39, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of The Masked Singer (American TV series) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 14:02, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

On 22 June 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Masked Singer (American TV series), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that to prevent spoilers, the name of the American reality singing competition The Masked Singer is not listed on contracts with celebrities competing on the show? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Masked Singer (American TV series). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, The Masked Singer (American TV series)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 00:02, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2020–21 Canadian network television schedule, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 48 Hours ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver).

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:13, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

No clue if the show is worth mentioning at The Masked Singer (American TV series)#Cultural impact, but Nickelodeon has a virtually produced game show coming up, which Hollywood Reporter refers to as, "an internet-assisted Masked Singer". Here's the promo for it (obviously don't use it as a source, just sharing so you can see the promo yourself :P) and here's the official press release for it. Magitroopa ( talk) 19:20, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

@ Magitroopa: Wow the promo video looks like a complete rip-off of the show lol. Definitely some resemblance there. Will add to cultural impact in a few minutes. Heartfox ( talk) 19:27, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

I've made some cosmetic changes to the tables here (mostly eliminating unnecessary use of 'small text'). But the table at the bottom (the 'series' one) uses both 'colspan' and 'rowspan' in a way that is likely problematic (at least, I find it so). The use of 'colspan' especially precludes having that table be sortable, which strikes me as a bad idea. (And I think it's entirely unsourced.) So you'll want to pay close attention to that one. I also have no idea what the timeline is trying to say or accomplish – I would advise just eliminating that... FWIW, my $0.02. -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 02:17, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

	The Original Barnstar
	I know it's hard to withdraw a FAC that isn't getting attention, but it is the sign of a good editor that they want to improve the article more than chase the shiney star. Thank you for being a good editor. Ealdgyth ( talk) 18:45, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Masked Singer (American TV series), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Variety and Vanity Fair.

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:22, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Just as an FYI, in case you haven't seen... looks like they're following suit with the live rounds of AGT. [1] [2] [3] Magitroopa ( talk) 16:42, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

@ Magitroopa: Yeah I saw that yesterday. Great news! Based on the taping dates in groups of three it looks like their following the same format in season 3. In a recent Instagram Live interview Toybina said she was working on 15 costumes, but idk how accurate that is. Heartfox ( talk) 19:08, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

It definitely should be quite an interesting season... especially should be interesting for all TV shows when they're looked back at with such a weird new formatting years from now. Anyways, I know you added in the info about the production venue change (moving to Red Studios Hollywood)- obviously we don't want to conduct any original research, but this could be somewhat related, even though it states that no productions were affected. Who knows at this point?... Magitroopa ( talk) 18:27, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Apparently Red Studios can be rented? I guess they chose that location to be able to film now for a September premiere instead of Television City where there's multiple things being shot (increased risk) and probably would have delayed production. Heartfox ( talk) 18:33, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Dear Heartfox,

For awhile, I was convinced that the earliest instance of the total number of viewers per episode did not exist until the 1989-1990 season, as the 7th season of Cheers (1988-1989) did not have the number of viewers, only since the 8th season, so the 1989-1990 season. However, I was very impressed to see that on Roseanne, you added sources for the viewers for its first season, so 1988-1989. I really wanted to use the source for Cheers, but I cannot access it. I suppose all I'm asking is if you wouldn't mind using that source for the viewers of the 7th season of Cheers? Of course, I am assuming that source does indeed show the season 7 viewers for Cheers as well. Thanks in advance.

Alaios ( talk) 15:31, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Alaios! USA Today on ProQuest has viewership calculated by Nielsen from the week of July 25, 1988, to the week of March 11, 1991. They actually started reporting in September 1987 for the 1987-88 season, however those figures include viewership calculated by AGB Television Research (not Nielsen) and those numbers are quite lower than Nielsen's and so I would avoid using them as it's hard to compare when everything else is Nielsen. However, they switched from AGB to Nielsen for viewership for the week of July 25, 1988. So yes, viewership is available before the 1989-1990 season. The USA Today stuff actually goes beyond March 1991, however they aren't archived in ProQuest. (However we know they exist because the anythingkiss refs and stuff use USA Today, but they're copyvios and so shouldn't be used). I can add the 1988-89 figures to Cheers in a few days; just a bit busy right now. Heartfox ( talk) 17:09, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Heartfox Thanks for the information! I suspected that it should have been somewhere around there, so essentially (since everything is basically Nielsen) the earliest season we can utilize trusted sources would be the 1988-1989. For the USA Today stuff, wouldn't it be possible to find a way to directly cite the newspaper? For example, Seinfeld episodes use that, where they directly cite Nielsen Ratings through USA Today. Either way, thanks for responding timely and I look forward to having Cheers season 7 viewership completed. :D

Alaios ( talk) 22:56, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

So starting with episode 7 of I Can See Your Voice (American TV series), it looks like they tweaked the format? I'm not exactly sure how to word it on the page though. DarkFireYoshi 22:45, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

@ DarkFireYoshi: I don't know, I don't watch the show maybe ask on the article's talk page. Heartfox ( talk) 03:47, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

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) 02:43, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Heartfox! Re this edit summary to Good News (Megan Thee Stallion album), I thought I’d just clarify something. I used the reFill2 tool to fill these citations in, and I’m pretty sure reFill2's default is to use the | via = template when adding websites. Maybe this is something to bring up at a relevant talk page?? Anyways, just wanted to clarify for you! Have a great day! D🐶ggy54321 ^{( let's chat!)} 13:19, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank so very much for your edit. Information on the amount of viewers is extremely useful. If my understanding of how American programs are rated regarding their viewership, that means 11 million poeple watched the movie when it first aired, and that it was the second most viewed show / film during that 2-hour time slot, right? PanagiotisZois ( talk) 21:10, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

@ PanagiotisZois: it's actually not the number of viewers; 11.5 is the average percentage of households with television sets who watched the show at any given minute of its broadcast. Yes, it was the second highest-rated in its time slot... although there was another show from 10-11 pm that got an 11.7 but idk if that counts as the same time slot. I Saw What You Did went from 9-11 pm, as did Rambo: First Blood Part II. Good luck with the article! Heartfox ( talk) 21:18, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

The actual number of viewers according to Nielsen was unavailable in the source, so the household rating of 11.5 is given. Heartfox ( talk) 21:20, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Heartfox!

You did a really great job providing the viewership for it for season 1 and half of season 2. If the figures are available on ProQuest, do you mind finishing up the second half of season 2, as in episodes 13 through 24? I only can find figures for starting of the 1990-1991 season, so I could try doing some of the later seasons on my own. Thanks. :)

Alaios ( talk) 18:20, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Alaios viewership is on ProQuest until the week of March 13, 1991—I will add it shortly! What's your source for the rest of the seasons? Heartfox ( talk) 20:29, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Most of the rest of the seasons would be from USA Today; some people do have screenshots of them online, so similar to the way people cited them for Seinfeld, basically citing the Nielsen Ratings section of the particularly on USA Today directly. Alaios ( talk) 21:22, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Alaios those screenshots were taken down in august/september this year! You have to find them on the internet archive now lol... luckily the vast majority are archived. Heartfox ( talk) 21:36, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Exactly; I managed to find many of them, thanks to the internet archives, so it should not be too hard lol! Alaios ( talk) 21:39, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Alaios why did you remove decimal places from certain viewership? It's always better to list it in ten thousands rather (1.11) rather than hundred thousands (1.1). I would strongly suggest reverting those edits. For ER, all but the first and second seasons has information available to list viewership in ten thousands. MOS:TVRECEPTION also says "viewership should be presented in tables or templates as being rounded to the nearest million (for example, 2,653,000 should be written as 2.65)" (not 2.7). Heartfox ( talk) 01:23, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

About that, usually when I did that, it was because to maintain consistency with how the initial seasons were rounded up, which as you saw, were to one decimal place. I do understand it's more accurate to list for ten thousands, but not that it is more recommended. I have gone and reverted all the seasons I rounded up to one decimal place of ER.

Alaios ( talk) 01:48, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Live-In, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hugh Maguire.

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:08, 21 December 2020 (UTC)