This page 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.

In the List of 2012 albums, you reverted my edit because you say it's "not sourced" yet you ignore entries without a source that have genres listed. Cased in point is Muse, Lupe Fiasco, The Killers, The Pineapple Thief, etc.. You see how backwards that is? Mr. C.C. ^{Hey yo!} _{I didn't do it!} 19:37, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

But upon further looking, I put the wrong genre. I thought it was another artist. I just seen the name "Clay" and thought it was Clay Walker. My bad. Mr. C.C. ^{Hey yo!} _{I didn't do it!} 19:43, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

@ Mr. C.C. those other genres are sourced in those albums' articles. The Clay Aiken album doesn't have an article to house any other sources. And this implies that you would've added the genre to a Clay Walker entry without sourcing it properly, which still would've been undone. QuietHere ( talk | contributions) 04:41, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

If you read what I said after, I said I got the person wrong based on the first name which is why I removed it.

All entries still need a source regardless if genre is stated or not. You can't pick and choose what to source and what not to source. There are very few instances where sourcing a list isn't necessary. Case in point is List of YouTubers. A consensus was reached that you can find sources in the article of the YouTuber or their channel. In regards to album lists, unless a discussion happened and consensus was reached about not sourcing certain entries, you need to source. Verifiability is one of the fundamentals of Wikipedia. Mr. C.C. ^{Hey yo!} _{I didn't do it!} 08:17, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@ Mr. C.C. I saw your second message; it is not relevant to the point that I'm making, which is that you can't add unsourced genres to the list, no matter what. As for the unsourced entries, that discussion was had here and it was agreed upon that due to reasonable limitations on page size/template count, the best way to reduce size was by removing unnneeded refs. In those cases, we are checking that the genres are properly sourced in the albums' articles, and removing them in both places if they are not. All the genres listed are (or at least should be) reliably sourced. QuietHere ( talk | contributions) 10:22, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

I'm pretty curious about my reverted edits over at E3 (album), because I don't think I've ever seen anybody so defensive over the phrase "studio album" and categorizing Midwxst as an American musician and not an Indianapolis musician. Is there something different with E3 that I'm not getting? You created the article Trip9love, and used the phrasing "studio album" and categorized Tirzah as an English singer-songwriter, which is correct. Why didn't you just specify it as an "album" (no studio) and why did you classify her as an English artist and not an Essex artist like you did with Midwxst? What makes Midwxst's case different? I'm sure I'm missing something because I'm beyond confused, if I am let me know, but I've never seen the start of an album article written in the style as E3. Sorry if I'm a burden but I just need to know what's up. Locust member ( talk) 03:24, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Just wanted to give you a heads up that I have been thinking about stitching together the two halves of the list of 2022 albums back together again, now that the size has come down from its peak. The two articles, List of 2022 albums (January–June) and List of 2022 albums (July–December), have a size of 196,776 bytes and 279,047 bytes respectively, or a combined total of 475,823 bytes. Before the article was split, it was at about 505,000 bytes and I was estimating that it would grow to about 515,000 bytes as a maximum. The maximum article size in Wikipedia as of today per Wikipedia:Database reports/Articles by size is 720,588 bytes. If the two articles were merged, and assuming no duplicate wording was removed, this combined article would then become the 58th largest article in Wikipedia, very large but not overbearing in the scheme of things.

The discussion to split the article, at Talk:List of 2022 albums (July–December)#Split, was leaning heavily to the support of a split, but was never taken to a poll or an enforced split, so I had thrown out the mention that I would splice the article back together when the size came down. Now I think we are ready for this. I do fear the complication that there is a disambiguation page taking up the space that I would move the article back into, List of 2022 albums, so that I believe that I will need to reach out to an administrator to complete the splice and name restoration, so I thought I would reach out to you for thoughts and suggestions. Definitely want a history merge as well. Will it be necessary to open up the discussion again in the talk page, because it would be a controversial move? I figure I would lose a poll on merging the two articles, so I was hoping to just do it, and ask forgiveness later, but I think the technical complications will stop me. What thoughts do you have here? Mburrell ( talk) 23:54, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

@ Mburrell You're definitely gonna have to involve an admin either way. I don't know too many admins on here too well so I don't know if there are any who wouldn't just tell you to put it to a poll, so it might just be worth swallowing that and hoping it goes your way. Personally, I've noticed that the list pages can lag a bit for me during certain operations, and my internet is quite good, so I imagine folks in areas with worse coverage would be having trouble with the lists generally. I'm not sure how I would vote in such a poll; it probably depends on if other folks report significant performance issues. I think it'd be fine on my end if they were merged together, but I'd hate to put an unnecessary burden on other editors. QuietHere ( talk | contributions) 00:03, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Well, I will then wait until the start of the next year, so that a slicing article poll does not get tangled in a potential split 2023 album list poll that might spring up between now and the end of the year. Mburrell ( talk) 23:34, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Are you so opposed to the use of Template:Cite magazine that you need to manually revert or basically get into an edit war with an editor over it? Do you feel that strongly about getting your way or having an article you started the "way it was" on this issue no other editor even worries about that you want to waste time manually restoring it? Come on. Even you have better things to be doing on this website that I don't believe you need to be policing articles you created to this extent. Also, don't put words into my mouth. I never said you must use cite magazine or that it's against our guidelines to use cite news, but it's best practice for magazines to use cite magazine, hence why there is a literal bot that converts the citation template to cite magazine for magazines. I don't know where along the line you became so opposed to this to the extent you now have a "deny bots" template at the top of articles you create to prevent the citation bot from correctly changing the citation type to cite magazine but it would be far simpler to just...not be opposed to it. Ss 112 12:37, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

If I were you, I also wouldn't be accusing others of "obsessing over irrelevant details" when my moving that parameter was simply part of a larger edit. If a nitpicky WP:POINTy edit like that isn't "obsessing over irrelevant details", what is? Ss 112 12:42, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Never Falter Hero Girl. Thanks! BuySomeApples ( talk) 01:59, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

@ BuySomeApples and I have replied to it there. Thank you for your review. QuietHere ( talk | contributions) 02:03, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Never Falter Hero Girl. Thanks! BuySomeApples ( talk) 08:30, 29 November 2023 (UTC)