User talk:Oroborvs

Hi Oroborvs! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Cullen328 (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:04, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dolores O'Riordan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New York (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:19, 13 October 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) 00:25, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome.

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:48, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fylindfotberserk Thank you!–Oroborvs (talk) 11:07, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Angelo Badalamenti has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:32, 22 July 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) 03:02, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. In regards to classifying Gerrard's music, I think we must plant a few concrete posts for readers who know little to nothing about her or her music. Genres help in this regard. We can do this and acknowledge that DCD are anti-movements/genres. - HappyWaldo (talk) 23:38, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HappyWaldo: Hi. For "neoclassical dark wave", I can get along with you, even though I don't really like it. But I don't agree with this sentence in the lead: "she played a pivotal role in the city's Little Band scene and fronted post-punk group Microfilm". This is irrelevant because she only wrote two songs with this group as a beginner artist: "Centrefold" and "Widow". It's puffery. Considering the insignificance of this group compared to her huge discography in 30 years of career (see: Lisa Gerrard discography) the sentence must be condensed as: "she played with post-punk group Microfilm, before co-founding .. . ", per WP: CONCISE. As a whole Gerrard is a classical/avant-garde/baroque singer who recorded albums with Pieter Bourke, Patrick Cassidy, Yordan Kamdzhalov, Klaus Schulze, The Mystery Of The Bulgarian Voice; emphasizing Microfilm is irrelevant. Oroborvs (talk) 14:04, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The term "neoclassical dark wave" is pretty laughable imo, but not many bands can claim a whole (sub)genre. Worth noting. Also I'm not sure it's puffery to highlight the little bands/Microfilm. Maybe WP:FANCRUFT or assigning undue weight. But even then I disagree, as it covers her post-punk origins. Gerrard first began performing in the scene and went on to sing for several little bands. It's also where she met Perry, so it leads logically into DCD. If anything, I would leave the little bands and drop Microfilm. - HappyWaldo (talk) 21:32, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HappyWaldo: Hi. Yes that's what I think too, that's why I refer to what DCD says in interviews rather than focusing on what journalists write. That's why I deleted "Gothic rock" from the infobox. Anyway, it's ok with what you wrote, I can agree with you, not a drama. Instead, I'll add a few lines about her collaborations that she had outside of DCD, to compensate with Microfilm/DCD – that will strike a balance. Also, I noticed some copy/paste in the body, so I rewrote differently and found some sources; the subsection Film career is suspicious, to me, I guess that's why there are no sources. Oroborvs (talk) 14:39, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted an insertion of unsourced info into the Miley Cyrus article, and your edit (that fixed the broken tag) got nailed, too. Just wanted to let you know I wasn't aiming at you. Cheers! — UncleBubba ^{( T @ C )} 17:46, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@UncleBubba: Hi. No problem, the section was messy anyway. Oroborvs (talk) 18:20, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Dolores O'Riordan has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 01:23, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	As one of the people who participated in its GAR a few years back, I want to say I'm proud for the work you've done! keep it up! dannymusiceditor oops 16:25, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@DannyMusicEditor: Hi. It's very nice. I have my first Barnstar. Thank you very much. Oroborvs (talk) 17:10, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gojira is one of my favorite metal bands and it's good to see it getting the attention it needed. Do you plan on going for good article again on it? dannymusiceditor ^oops 21:37, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@DannyMusicEditor: It's quite catchy indeed. I don't have anything planned at the moment, why not if I find some quality content to add on it. I'm trying to find content from the Godzilla or Terra Incognita era. The Gojira page seems stable to me. I could develop From Mars to Sirius. Oroborvs (talk) 23:49, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Oroborvs, I never got back to you on this because I wanted to see how much progress would come along with a bit more time, but I would like to clarify on this message that I was not referring to just Gojira being any very good Wikipedia article, but actually being nominated for addition to a high-standard list (here is the French equivalent). You see, Gojira's English page used to be one of these, but the standards were lower back when it was listed and the editor who made it that way retired not long after reaching that point. The condition of the article ultimately decayed, and I actually participated in the discussion that led to its removal it looked like this. With all the hard work you've done, however, I'm now thinking it might deserve to be re-nominated for that status. You understand me?

What do you think? I would be willing to help such an effort if you decide to try, seeing as your native language is French and I have several successful nominations. dannymusiceditor ^oops 01:10, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@DannyMusicEditor: Hi Daniel. I understand what you are telling me, and I agree to re-nominate the status of the page, Gojira (band). Like I said below to Mungo Kitsch, I have no experience with the page status review process. So, yes, I would like you to help me now. I also want the page to reach GA status. I had to buy nine magazines on eBay to bring in sources.

I have a question − it would be unfortunate that the nomination could fail because of this point: I don't know what to do with the source number 11. The only source that bothers me − although I do not doubt that the content is factual. It's a review of concerts by the Duplantier brothers from the pre-Godzilla era. But this is the only generated-user source on the page; I do not know if I should delete it or not? Oroborvs (talk) 13:07, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We could possibly just delete it. Do you think the other source next to it [1] cover the article's material well enough?

As for ensuring the article's writing style is in good shape, I will enlist the help of someone in the Guild of Copy Editors to help improve it. Since it is a very large job, I think someone dedicated to that particular type of work would be best to have a look at it.

Finally, I could nominate the article in your name, and list myself as an endorsement of sorts, someone willing to help with the process, if you would like. dannymusiceditor ^oops 23:30, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I noticed you had added some samples into the article. While it would be very informative, I'm not sure they pass the non-free content criteria, and they would need to in order for the article to be promoted. Particularly, I'm concerned they do not fulfill criteria 3a or 8 as they are now; five is usually too many from what I've been told in my previous nominations (Deftones was where I learned this; I removed two of the five existing samples), and they would need to be captioned with something that would tie them into the text other than the recordings just appearing on an album. dannymusiceditor ^oops 23:36, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@DannyMusicEditor: Hi. I deleted the source and rewrote the sentence, supported by the remaining one, so it is okay.

Indeed it will be better this way with a person dedicated to controlling the articles' writing. From what I see, we have time; the wait is one month.

That is nice to help me out; that is what I was initially looking for because I was in deadlock.

As for the files, I ripped the audio and uploaded it mechanically. I saw that it did not meet the criteria this morning, also I now understand that three audio files per article are sufficient; my TV failed to load the page. In fact, "Of Blood and Salt" must be deleted. The audio file "Ocean Planet" was moved to From Mars to Sirius article.

Otherwise, I do not know what to do with the Indigenous Brazilian child picture − if it should be kept or not; it looks a bit weird? Although the Amazon rainforest deforestation picture next to it is relevant, I guess. Oroborvs (talk) 19:27, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My personal opinion would be to remove the child; while it is relevant, it does not look visually well-presented in my opinion. I have nominated the article for GA status in your name, with me as a co-nominator and supporter for your case. dannymusiceditor ^oops 02:34, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@DannyMusicEditor: I thank you for having listed the page − in my name in the good article nominations and for staying to support. I removed the image of the child; it is better that way indeed. Also, can you give me your opinion on the images of the Amazon rainforest deforestation and the whale and Lord Buddha? I cannot assess alone whether it is relevant or inconvenient. Oroborvs (talk) 17:42, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I really do not know. I tend to only illustrate band and music pages with shots of performances and the band's members, myself; if anywhere, I typically illustrate individual recordings with these kinds of images. I think using the rainforest deforestation is good, but I do not know what the *band's* article really gains from having them. I don't think it's inherently bad, just unconventional. What we could do is wait until we get the opinion of a good article reviewer; so long that the images are free images, there won't be much of a problem when we come to that question. dannymusiceditor ^oops 03:03, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@DannyMusicEditor: Hi. I plan to delete these images shortly, before reaching the evaluation, as it becomes uncomfortable. It is indeed unconventional; it was a test at first, but I got used to it. I will move the image's captions to the adequate albums articles. It doesn't help the page, but there will be a portion of text at the bottom of Gojira's article without an image. Oroborvs (talk) 16:41, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing necessarily wrong with that. Images are there to be used only when both available and appropriate. dannymusiceditor ^oops 17:05, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@DannyMusicEditor: Another questioning (that should be the last) that requires a second opinion is the band Cavalera Conspiracy in the subsection Side projects. Although being connected to Joe Duplantier, this is not really a side-project of Gojira, I presume. Therefore, I am thinking of deleting that subsection and putting some info on Joe Duplantier's article. Oroborvs (talk) 23:36, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is valid, I have always thought of "super groups" like Cavalera Conspiracy as side projects to the original bands of the members who formed the super group. I also, however, see that it is not related to Gojira as strongly as the others are, so perhaps we could list it toward the end of the section? The section definitely is not completely without merit to the band's history, so I think it works better here than anywhere else. dannymusiceditor ^oops 17:12, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@DannyMusicEditor: Hi. So okay, I was about to delete the subsection but I'm changing my mind. By placing Cavalera Conspiracy at the end of the section I thought of WP:NPOV, which is why I listed the whole section in chronological date order. For now, for my part, I do not see anything else that could be problematic. Oroborvs (talk) 19:58, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

		The Metal Music Barnstar'
		For all the hard work you've done to help improve Heavy Metal music related articles, no matter what sub-genre it may be, I hereby award you this kick-ass barnstar! Keep it Metal! Mad props to you, @Oroborvs! You are showing an excellent dedication to not just expanding and fortifying the coverage of Joe Duplantier, but also to building an encyclopedia. Your edit counts alone on the Joe Duplantier page are astounding, but you also give expansion after expansion after expansion, and have yet to lose steam. I've worked hard on it over the years too, even as I revived it from a redirect in 2009; but I never thought the article would become as excellent as it is in the present state. It is currently rated as a start-class article, but I believe this needs an update/upgrade. Keep on keepin' on! Mungo Kitsch (talk) 01:50, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PS: If you're interested, I believe the John Haughm article needs this or a similar treatment; it is skeletal, not thorough in enough areas, and has undue weight issues. Mungo Kitsch (talk) 01:50, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Mungo Kitsch: Hi! Your praise and the Barnstar are much appreciated. I had all the information; it was just a matter of finding the time necessary to expand the page. Feel free to correct any grammatical or wording mistakes. I agree with your suggestion to upgrade the article, although I have no experience in the process of assessment. I'll see for John Haughm; I just have to find the time to immerse myself in the artist's biography! Have a nice day. Oroborvs (talk) 10:33, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Gojira - Of Blood and Salt.ogg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 01:10, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Gojira - Ocean Planet.ogg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 01:50, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My friend, you seem upset about how I edited the section last night. I didn't mean for you to take it personally, and most of the points you made are fine. I thought Morin's insight specifically on how he thought Spiritbox was difficult to categorize was thorough enough that it would be worth including, but better off as a side note. If you think that box is ugly, that's fine, but what do you think about including it somehow else? I could add something to the |quote= parameter of the reference.

As for Revolver, WP:PUBLISHED does make a good case, but the content inside of it seemed (from my perspective) to be less thoroughly notable as quoted material. All I feel that they are offering is describing the band as alternative metal (which I noted above a couple sentences before) with djent influences, even though we already have people calling them djent directly, so I thought it mostly superfluous. Or, we could add more in-depth opinions from the publishers already offered - I see at least a couple that I think meet WP:PUBLISHED. I just see an inconsistency here, I guess is what I am trying to say. (Also, I agree that idea of "postcore" Morin offered is silly and will leave that out of the quote should I add that.) dannymusiceditor ^oops 15:47, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@DannyMusicEditor: There is nothing personal but the article is seen worldwide. Well, Morin's review is a nightmare to me 🤐. I think a quote box is useless. Visually it gives the impression of being a major piece of the article: a review of Metal Injection and a new genre invented for Spiritbox by Morin (who?) as a conclusion: Postcore. There are several "versions" to describe their music that contradict each other: LaPlante says they do metalcore: "I wanna be, like, the 2 Chainz of metalcore". I always listen to what the artist has to say, he knows his sound and his influences. Loudwire says that their sound is "ethereal post-metal and straight-up metalcore"; Loudwire is very straightforward. Kerrang! says it's "100% post-metal" (ridiculous. The two-thirds of "Constance" is post-metal – but the end is a big metalcore breakdown). Morin says it's "useless" to categorize them but in a stupidly contradictory way concludes that it's Postcore. We both know that Spiritbox is not in the punk rock music genre; it's a metal band with a djent guitar tone. Morin who failed his review "tried" to say that "post" + "metal" + "core" = post-metalcore. Knowing that post-metalcore redirects to metalcore, I can say in a very neutral way that the metalcore genre dominates the section, but as I did not say in the article due to the NPOV, then the metalcore genre appears first in the list of genres. If Morin really means Postcore = "punk rock music genre", then his review is reeeaaally bad.

This is why the first sentence of Morin's review: "Writing for Metal Injection, Max Morin wrote that attempting to pigeonhole the band to any particular music style is 'pointless'" is enough, because the rest of his review is easy to discredit, and readers of the page won't appreciate Morin's opinion either. Indeed, to say that "They could fall under the broad category of 'metalcore', but there's barely any similarity to the big names of that genre", while New Noise Magazine says the opposite ("Canadian metalcore juggernaut Spiritbox"), tends to define an NPOV problem. Why the quote from Metal Injection but not the one from New Noise Magazine? Also, what he says: "Prog metal implies a more technical approach, while pop metal doesn't feel heavy enough": what are his qualifications to say that Stringer is not a technical guitarist? Stringer is considered a veteran; the readers will laugh. And this: "Djent has fallen out of fashion", while Spiritbox has itself a super modern Djent guitar sound; yet another contradiction. That's why we have to drop this review from Morin and leave the section stable; the current state of this section is correct and neutral, as all opinions are exposed, without emphasizing one music critic in particular, to the detriment of another.

A quote from Kerrang! which is the antithesis of Morin's review (three quarters at the bottom of the page), and professionally written: "Perhaps Eternal Blue’s most striking achievement is its refusal to be pegged by the most basic definition of the word. Certainly, this is a record born from the band's post-metalcore roots; the likes of The Acacia Strain and Architects (whose vocalist, Sam Carter, features on the bludgeoning track Yellowjacket) being clear influences on the tones and tunings at play throughout the record’s heaviest moments. Riffs – technical riffs, challenging riffs – abound; breakdowns, too. But Eternal Blue is a record, crucially, of different dimensions and colours. Genre conventions are instructive, yet not restrictive, and so those same bruising djent grooves come laced with an underlying warmth, too". You can see one more element that contradicts Morin's review → Kerrang!: "technical riffs" → Morin: "Prog metal implies a more technical approach". I don't recognize Spiritbox's album, Eternal Blue, in Morin's review, unlike Kerrang's.

Revolver magazine's quote: "alt-metal with elegant vocals and thunderous djent grooves"; because it's well written, the alt-metal genre could tone down the metalcore genre a bit, and the "djent gooves" appears, again, like in Kerrang's quote above; you see the agreement of opinions between these two critcs. The quality of writing and knowledge of these published sources speaks for itself. What is superfluous and unnecessary is the review by Morin, the Postcore genre is, therefore, post-metalcore, which is also noted in the text. This "Nevertheless" which opened the section and made the link between the quote from Morin and all the genres did not seem neutral; Morin's review with his Postcore dominates all other genres. About Spiritbox = Postcore, yes it is silly, because it will spread over the internet and it is inappropriate. Oroborvs (talk) 21:59, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So we definitely agree that this "postcore" thing is utter nonsense. But here's what I find fascinating. Apparently, Max Morin also writes for Exclaim!: [2] 🤔 dannymusiceditor ^oops 22:06, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I nominated that "postcore" redirect for deletion. For all we know "postcore" and "post-metalcore" are the same thing! There's not even mention of it in post-hardcore!

One final thing: so, if I understand you correctly, what you are trying to tell me is that his views are fringe? I could get behind that, I didn't see it before. dannymusiceditor ^oops 22:16, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@DannyMusicEditor: Daniel, yeah "postcore" is a nonsense, we know post-punk, post-rock, post-metal, and so on... I can't wait for the post-morincore 😁. Indeed, he is doing better for interviews, the information are consistent with other sources; but note the inconsistency and contradiction in the second paragraph of the interview: "progressive djent band". You did well nominated "postcore". Also, post-metalcore redirects to metalcore; it must be a little different from the metalcore genre. Yes, I wrote a long text because I hadn't seen the fringe page; that's quite right: strange and personal theories. Mike Stringer is a multi-instrumentalist, and Spiritbox has prog element and technique contrary to what Morin says. Have a nice evening, it's 1:30 am here. Oroborvs (talk) 23:49, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good news, friend! I began writing an article for the now notable debut album for the band, located here. I just wanted to thank you for your hard work on the band's article, and wanted to let you know that most of the content in the article I took from your work. Let me know what you think and if I should include anything else - of course, I am not done yet, but from what is there currently, I did make some omissions that were not directly related to the album and more relevant to the band's page. dannymusiceditor ^oops 02:22, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@DannyMusicEditor: Hi! I saw this morning before going to work that you had created the page. Thanks that's cool. I was too lazy the last few days to do this.

I wanted to tell you that I'm going to do several passages on the page of the album that you created because there is information to add; songwriting started in 2018 and 2019. Also a #Commercial performance section would be added if you agree, as I am inspired by Featured Articles for the name of the sections, such as Déjà Vu (Beyoncé song) or 4 (Beyoncé album). I saw info here for the section #Personnel.Oroborvs (talk) 15:41, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is only one problem with using that source for personnel. Technically, Discogs fails WP:USERG, and I only ever use it (rarely) when a shot of the album's credits are visible, and I cannot see that in the pictures provided. dannymusiceditor ^oops 18:25, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@DannyMusicEditor: Yes, it's indeed user-generated, and I can't find anything on google either. Oroborvs (talk) 19:32, 30 September 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) 00:57, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Gojira (band) 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 Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 16:40, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Gojira (band) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Gojira (band) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 20:20, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Gojira (band) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Gojira (band) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 19:21, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A little late, I didn't see the award until now - congratulations buddy. It was my pleasure to help you. Maybe in the future we can do Spiritbox and/or Eternal Blue together! dannymusiceditor ^oops 17:24, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@DannyMusicEditor: Let's see for Spiritbox; with images as well. Did you see that the Gojira timeline has reappeared. Oroborvs (talk) 20:06, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Oroborvs . I noticed that you [3] used usanewscourt.com as a source in Dolores O'Riordan. I am unable to find any evidence or discussion indicating that it meets reliable sourcing criteria for such information, and I've found other usanewscourt.com that use Wikipedia as a reference. I've gone ahead and removed it. If you disagree, let's discuss it. Thanks.--Hipal (talk) 22:56, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hipal: Hi. There is no problem. Indeed, the website is not reliable; it was a time when I only had four months of experience on WP. Have a good day, Hipal. Oroborvs (talk) 16:28, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Orborvs. Thanks for your response at the IP talk page. Could you undo your other couple recent vandalism templates. I think your view of the changes being overly detailed is reasonable, but the IP changes weren't vandalism. I reverted one and I'd appreciate it if you'd revert or blank the others. Thanks, Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:22, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Firefangledfeathers: It was not vandalism but disruptive editing of the Newcastle upon Tyne IP. I remember seeing an IP from this area doing the same editing style on this article. I wanted him to stop. So other IPs who came to do c/e on these edits, I thought it was people who knew each other. It seems difficult to log in or create an account for some. --Oroborvs (talk) 18:50, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification, context, and self-rvs! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:04, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been invited to join the Adele WikiProject, a WikiProject on the English Wikipedia dedicated to improving articles and lists related to Adele. If you are interested in joining, please visit the project page and add your name to the list of participants. Thank You.

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Seventeen Going Under, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 27 August 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) 01:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Salut, old friend. It's been a while since we teamed up for our efforts on Spiritbox and Gojira. Are you currently working on Spiritbox? I would like to bring the band article, as well as Eternal Blue, to good article eventually, and I was wondering if it was okay if I would nominate it at this time. I also noticed an old talk page message regarding your opinion of their touring section - I don't think it's so bad for the moment, but as the band goes on more I do agree that it eventually will be necessary to work it into the history section. dannymusiceditor ^oops 18:15, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@DannyMusicEditor: Hi Dan. I am not working on any Spiritbox articles and have no plans for articles relating to this band. It does not bother me if you bring these articles forward towards a good article nomination; you can also put them in your own name. Also, that does not bother me if you rephrase some passages I wrote in these Spiritbox articles. Not sure if the awards section is updated, though. I also think that their touring section will expand over the years; I found having the tours in the career section would be more standard. Oroborvs (talk) 22:30, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is a new requested move discussion in progress for the Charles III article. Since you participated in the previous discussion, I thought you might like to know about this one. Cheers. Rreagan007 (talk) 07:19, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Since you recently participated in the Charles III requested move discussion, I thought you might like to know that there are two other discussions currently going on about other British monarch article titles here and here. Cheers. Rreagan007 (talk) 22:26, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 9 October 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Spiritbox, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after their 2020 tour was cancelled due to the COVID-19 pandemic, Spiritbox received $10,000 from Shinedown's Brent Smith, a stranger, to cover losses? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Spiritbox. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Spiritbox), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 00:02, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, dear friend! Thank you very much for the article, I liked it very much! I wanted to ask you - can I eventually nominate an article for "good" status? When nominating I will mention you as the author of the article. Ukrainian Wikipedia is very lacking articles about such beautiful and outstanding women as Monica Bellucci. And in general, we have few articles about world-class stars. I like Bellucci very much, I want to make a tribute to her. And I advise you to nominate your article for this status too, she deserves it. I'm a little embarrassed to ask this, but I'll risk it nonetheless. If not, I thank you very much anyway! I apologize for the broken English. Unfortunately, I don't speak English, so I had to use a bunch of machine translation of the internet, and then finalize the text myself. Sincerely, Nikolai!--Парус (talk) 11:36, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Парус: Hi. Thank you for the kind words. Indeed, I will propose this article in English for good article nomination (GAN) when the time comes. I'm trying to improve the English article slightly, although it's heading towards the end. I don't know how it works on Wikipedia Ukraine because, on the English version, the editors have to go through the stage of a copy edit request to correct typos, spelling mistakes, tenses, and punctuation, before any good article nomination. I have not yet reached the point of making a copy edit request on the English page (however, this article has been copy-edited: List of Monica Bellucci performances). Maybe you should consider this if you want to nominate the Ukrainian article for a good article nomination. You can cite me as the primary author, knowing you translated everything into Ukrainian.

You should also take into account the improvements made for some time to the English article via the revision history. The "Modelling career" section now starts when she was 16; according to her statement, she began at that age (not at 13). All information before this age has been included in the "Early life" section.

Also, this sentence corresponds to 1997: Nina Hald of Berlingske said, "Cartier chose for the first time to associate an actress closely with the house".30

I improved this information corresponding to the 2007 date: Cartier designed a collection of luxury diamond jewellery inspired by Bellucci's private commission and bearing her name.[30]31 It was first presented at a Cartier event in Dubai in 2007. A jewellery collection named after an actress was unprecedented in Cartier's history.[30]

I found out that it was actually Carlo Vanzina who discovered her and recommended her to Dino Risi: Bellucci made her screen debut in 1990 in Dino Risi's television film Vita coi figli.[24] She was cast after Italian director Carlo Vanzina noticed a portrait photograph of her in a magazine and recommended her to Risi.49

I added this in the "Other activities" section: Bellucci is regarded in France as an ambassador of Italy.179

I added this in the "Public image" section: In 2018, Bellucci was named among the 100 most successful Italian women by Forbes Italy, listed alphabetically.199

I replaced the first source with an article from the newspaper La Stampa: Bellucci and Cassel have two daughters, Deva Cassel (born 12 September 2004) and Léonie (born 21 May 2010). Their daughters were born in Rome.215[216]

In the "Personal life" section, I added: in 2023, she purchased a villa on the Greek island of Paros.228, as well as, She does not have French nationality.[179]

In the "Acting credits and accolades" section, I changed a source to Der Spiegel instead, regarding this: In 2006, French Minister of the Interior Nicolas Sarkozy conferred her with the knight of the Order of Arts and Letters.232

I improved the Lead and the section: "2018–present: Recent career". Oroborvs (talk) 17:37, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message! On Ukrainian Wikipedia, an article also has to go through a review process before nomination. But because of the terrible war in our country, related to Russian aggression - we have few active users who are engaged in reviewing, so often it is necessary to nominate the article immediately, where in the course of voting its shortcomings begin to be eliminated. Noticed your recent changes to the article - I'm trying to keep that in mind too, but haven't finalized the work in that regard yet. Honestly, I like having the movieography and awards in the article itself better. I also decided to add more information about Bellucci's acting skills to the article, and added some more information about the movie Malena, and her childhood and teenage times. I added a little more about the Monica Bellucci rose. At a future nomination, I will be sure to mention you as the author of the article. Working on the translation of your article on Monica Bellucci is now helping me deal with severe depression caused by the terrible war. The absorption of working on your article in a way acts as an antidepressant - for which I thank you.--Парус (talk) 18:21, 15 October 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) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see you're the biggest contributor to Zombie (The Cranberries song). I stumbled upon the article, found it very high quality and after one edit to source unreferenced claims, nominated it for the GA. Thought would be no issue, specially considering how long people show up to review, but just as it was picked up it was erased for being a drive-by. Do you see any issue with my involvement, or find anything lacking on the page? (in any case, it could be renominated) igordebraga ≠ 00:29, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Igordebraga: I don't see any problem if you submit the article to a GA nomination. Finding good sources was a problem back then. I remember the "In Popular Culture" section was unmanageable, and this is still the case [4], with Facebook [5] which fails WP:RSPFB. Perhaps you will submit it first for a copy edit request. Oroborvs (talk) 18:28, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		The Good Article Barnstar
		For your contributions to Zombie (The Cranberries song), that has now joined the WP:GA after I cleaned it up during the review process. Great job! igordebraga ≠ 16:52, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Monica Bellucci shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Wracking ^talk! 23:07, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]