Synthwave.94

.

The Article Rescue Barnstar

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		Thankyou for your great work saving the article "Overpowered by Funk" from deletion! benzband (talk) 10:12, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

And this is from me:

		The Music Barnstar
		I award The Music Barnstar to Synthwave.94 for his exceptional effort on expanding and —probably— saving from deletion "Overpowered by Funk". –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:35, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Ben has anticipated my intention, as always :D. Once, again thank you. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:35, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Tool suggestion

Hi there, have you considered making use of a tool like Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser? It is built for making repetitive editing tasks a bit easier by semi-automating them. For example, you could make a list of articles that contain "New Wave" and tell it to change them to "New wave". You still have to review each change to make sure it's correct, but it might be a lot easier for something like that. Just a thought. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 01:37, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes it's true. However I don't know how tools like AutoWikiBrowser work... But thank you for your suggestion, that reminds me of something I'd like to talk about with somebody. Do you know if it is possible to create a bot (or an automatic tool) able to make changes like this one ? It would help me a lot. Synthwave.94 (talk) 01:45, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

AutoWikiBrowser does some of that type of stuff.. general maintenance and cleanup of articles that you tell it to look at. Maybe you can look through Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/User manual and see if it would be easy to use. I know there is also a tool called Reflinks that automatically fixes and fills out references properly. See User:Dispenser/Reflinks. I don't actually know too much about bots except that they are generally programmed in Python. That is not my area of expertise at all. I do know that if you have a task you would like automated, you can ask at Wikipedia:Bot requests to see if an existing bot could be programmed to do the task. Hope this helps! --Spike Wilbury (talk) 02:01, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Well, I will take a look at these links as soon as possible. Thank you very much for all of this ! Synthwave.94 (talk) 02:09, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Ray Crisara

Did you hear that Ray Crisara just died? Sad news for Let's All Chant fans. :( DBaK (talk) 21:54, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

I didn't know who was Ray Crisara before you asked me this question. Now I know who is this guy but I've been unable to find something related to his death. Where did you get that from ? Synthwave.94 (talk) 22:28, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Hang your head in shame! <g> He MAKES the record!! (I'm totally unbiased here, of course.) The whole trumpet world is talking about it - he was very highly thought of and has lots of ex-students of great eminence. I'm seeing it on FB and in emails from colleagues, but when I see something citeable, I will either add it in or let you know ... how does that sound? Cheers DBaK (talk) 12:15, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

PS It might well show up here in time. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 12:19, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Just because I like "Let's All Chant" doesn't mean I know all artists who made this record. This is only one of the numerous disco records I'm listening to ! ;) But thank you for all this infos, I learned something I didn't know at all. Synthwave.94 (talk) 13:14, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Please don't take the "shame on you" too seriously. :) I am well aware that my angle on this stuff is a minority interest! It was just a joke, not a criticism of your musical knowledge - apologies for any offence ... it was not intended. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 13:25, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

I was a bit surprised by your "He MAKES the record!!". It may be true, but Zager made this record too. ;) Also don't worry, I understood you seems to be a die hard fan of Ray Crisara (and the "trumpet world" ?). Nice to see people like you love sharing knowledge. Once again thank you for all of this. ;) Synthwave.94 (talk) 13:39, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I will let you know if I turn up anything that could help. Cheers DBaK (talk) 15:04, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Happy New Year (song)

Could you keep an eye with the page? Make sure if contributors doing unsourced genres. 183.171.168.64 (talk) 16:34, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes of course. And I can clean up the article by the same way. ;) Synthwave.94 (talk) 16:35, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

"Azok voltak a szép idők, barátom"

Well, you certainly tidied up there. Care to discuss at the Talk Page? Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:44, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Wanted to say a big big thank you for noticing the dmy issue, Unbeknowingly I'd done the same thing to all of his singles/albums so took some time self reverting,, Anyway thank you :) Regards, –Davey2010 • (talk) 22:56, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

This is the reason why semi-automated tools should be used with extra care. ;) Synthwave.94 (talk) 23:25, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Absolutely agree! :), After yesterdays crap I'll most certainly take more care :)

Regards, –Davey2010 • (talk) 23:30, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi!

Hi, Synthwave.94! I am Isabella, Barbara's daughter, just wanted to say thank you for your accuracy.

Thanks. ^^ Synthwave.94 (talk) 20:56, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Get down!!

[1]. Thought you might appreciate this funk gem. Much shorter than the 9:05 12" remix, alas (where you can really get carried away with that overpowering synth-funk groove) - but I'd pleased to email you a copy if you'd like one. Meanwhile, please feel free to make any contribution you can to Robert Brookins. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:18, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Wow ! Never heard this before but this funky rhythm is so good ! Sounds like a mixture of "Living in America", "I'm in Love" and "Walk the Dinosaur", three great tracks you should listen to (if you don't already know them of course ^_^)

Can you give me your e-mail adress so I can e-mail you and then you'll can send me a copy ? I'm already excited about listening to it while editing Wikipedia at the same time ! X)

As soon as possible, I would try to help you improving the article you're talking about. You know I like improving music-related so there's no reason to ignore your suggestion ;) Regards and happy editing. Synthwave.94 (talk) 00:41, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, three great tracks, all well-known to me. Always nice to have a bit of "luxury". If you want my email you'll have to enable your contact option under User perefences! Martinevans123 (talk) 12:22, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

I think I managed to send you an e-mail. Please confirm it as soon as possible. Regards Synthwave.94 (talk) 18:14, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Just sent you a mp3. ENJOY!! Martinevans123 (talk) 20:13, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I've just seen it. Thanks a lot for sending me this 80s gem. Synthwave.94 (talk) 22:26, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Greek techno vandal

Your actions are mentioned at the case page Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Techno genre warrior from Greece. I thought you might want to know. Binksternet (talk) 19:42, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Well I knew I was mentioned in it, but thanks for the reminding ! Synthwave.94 (talk) 16:38, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

@Binksternet: : I think he is back...

I think you are correct. Binksternet (talk) 18:46, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Manics

Hi

Apologies - I did not notice you were using sfn, in my defence I was VERY tired!

Even if I had, I have never used them and got confused the only time I was copyediting a page and needed to convert lots of refs to sfn.

Thanks for fixing it :¬) Chaosdruid (talk) 16:21, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

I convert refs into sfn template as often as possible. It didn't take me a long time to convert everything for "La Tristesse Durera" (compared to a huge good/featured article) so don't be upset for this reason ! After all, improving a Wikipedia article is a cooperative work, isn't it ? ;) Synthwave.94 (talk) 16:34, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

Let's enjoy a snack for a bit. I do appreciate the work you are doing on the Christian metal list, despite the fact that I've gotten annoyed with some of your methods. Thank you. 3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:54, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Whenever you're done, I'll jump in

Whenever you feel your done on the list, would you mind leaving up the "under construction" tag? I'll be working on the template in one of my sandboxes, as I don't want to conflict with your edits. If there are artists I feel that you missed, for one reason or another, I'll see if I can find sources and add them, too.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 19:21, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Oh, I forgot to mention: If you don't have a copy of Powell's Encyclopedia of Contemporary Christian Music, I do have one, so if you want me to look anything up in there for you, I'll be happy to help.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 19:32, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

@3family6: : Thanks for your support. I think I will remove the "under construction" tag in some hours, because I think I would add more bands in the list, as I'm currently looking at the different reliable sources suggested at WP:CCM/S (realizing several online sources don't work any longer, by the way). I don't have Encyclopedia of Contemporary Christian Music and I used Google Books to find infos in this book. However I only managed to find infos about some bands only. Can you please tell me what Powell says about XT ? Is the band described as Christian metal or not ? Synthwave.94 (talk) 19:55, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes. Powell describes it as heavy metal that sounds very similar to Stiggson's Leviticus.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 03:42, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for mentioning that some sites on the list are defunct. One or two I knew about, I just didn't update the list to reflect that. I'll have to get on that at some point.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 03:53, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

@3family6: : I've just reogarnized the list and created a whole section for the defunct publications and websites. Synthwave.94 (talk) 12:39, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Also thanks for your answer regarding XT. Synthwave.94 (talk) 12:50, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Hey, wow! Thanks! You're welcome. I'm going to go through Powell's book myself to help populate the list more, as you might have missed some not having a full view of the book. I'm going to work more on the list in my sandbox, and then bring it over to mainspace.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:52, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Ok, from my side I will continue exploring the different websites found at WP:CCM/S in order to add more bands in the list. I intend starting completing the list soon, but I really don't how many times I would spend on it before finishing adding new entries. But anyway, thanks for helping adding new additions in the list. Synthwave.94 (talk) 15:03, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome. Whenever you're finished, I can jump in, too, so don't feel that this has to take up all your time.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:51, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

@3family6: : I would finish it in some hours. I wasn't editing Wikipedia after my very last edit on the page and I just came back. I will make a dummy edit to say to you when you could edit the page. Synthwave.94 (talk) 21:07, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For you work cleaning up list articles, including the List of Christian metal artists. 3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 17:32, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, and I'm going to continue doing so with other lists soon. Synthwave.94 (talk) 18:45, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

List of New Age music artists

Hello!

I'm currently adding some New Age artists (real, all those I append are known for a long time, and having produced many albums each one, and generally with international career) to the list.

And suddenly I see a new banner telling that the list is now restricted to autoconfirmed users. Is there a problem with my contributions? I've been contributor for years on the French Wikipedia (hundreds and hundreds of contributions, and some new articles) and sometimes on the English Wikipedia (less contributions of course but always serious).

I point out that I'm also myself New Age musician (amateur but quite known on KVRAudio with my nickname BlackWinny). My profession was biologist (now retired).

Could you give me some precisions?... if there are special things to do to be autoconfirmed for this page.

Cheers, Jacques Jacques Prestreau (talk) 22:48, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello Jacques,

The page is restricted to autoconfirmed users because several IPs added non notable artists to the list. Note that you're already an autoconfirmed user as you performed several edits under an account and over, well, several years ! It means you can edit this page as much as you want, but I need to give you some advices regarding music-related :

• The artist needs to have a Wikipedia page. You need to create a page first if the artist you want to add in this list doesn't have an article on the English Wikipedia yet.
• You need to add reliable sources to prove these artists are associated with the new-age genre, such as AllMusic, Rolling Stone and Spin but also newspapers and many other sources. As I've already improved several music-related lists before, I can help you finding reliable sources.
• Remember to be neutral and only uses short descriptions which can easily be checked (eg. the info is already sourced in the artist's article).

I hope you'll enjoy improving this list.

Regards,

Synthwave.94 (talk) 23:36, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Good job.

Lynchenberg (talk) 02:51, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Category:Singlechart_called_without_song

Hi Synthwave.94, I am wondering now how we can remove the category? I understand it's not needed for the link to work, but the category isn't something to be ignored completely. Either way, both versions work. I appreciate advice because this template isn't used when I was heavily editing WP before. I'm probably missing something. Thanks! --Efe (talk) 04:12, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I don't know how we are supposed to remove these categories. I guess we can ask for its deletion, as it doesn't appear to be useful in any way. The song parameter is unecessary for several singlechart templates, including the Canadatopsingles, Dutch40 and UK templates. The Ireland2 template is also a bit special. For example, if you search "20 th century boy", you'll find something. But if you search "20th century boy", nothing appears. Synthwave.94 (talk) 09:13, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

I'll probably post a request for comment at the cat talk page. Thanks!! --Efe (talk) 10:56, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Ok. Synthwave.94 (talk) 18:21, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Audio sample upload question

Hello. You appear to know a lot about Wikipedia and its music articles. I tried uploading a sound sample onto Wikipedia with a song from an album I bought on CD (and put onto my computer) and for some reason I wasn't able to upload even though I filled out all the required fields. I do feel like it might be because the audio was m4a instead of MP3. I didn't download an MP3 of the song because that's illegal (unless you download it and buy it at the same time on iTunes). How do I upload a song (in an m4a) that comes from a CD I bought and how do I put it into a 30-second sample? Statik N (talk) 17:26, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

I am sorry but I can't give you an actual answer. I never uploaded audio samples so far, only images. However here are some useful links I found in "My Favorites" :

• Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Music samples
• Template:Listen
• WP:Audio
• Audacity and Nero Multimedia Suite
• Some users discussions about the subject : "Baby", "Uploading Music Files" and "Music samples"

I hope it can help you. Synthwave.94 (talk) 17:36, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Christian metal list

The sources explicitly mention that EDL and Burden of a Day, respectively, are a mix of metal (melodic metalcore for the latter) with other styles, and are supported by an additional reference. So why are you treating those sources as though they don't support "metal" as a genre for those bands? My use of Twinkle in both cases was accidental, as I noted in my subsequent edit summaries. In Twinkle, the undo button is located underneath the vandalism rollback button, and both times I thought I clicked "undo" but apparently clicked "rollback" instead, and thus couldn't leave the edit summary that I desired both times. Sorry about that.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 17:36, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Burden of a Day are described as "Christian rockers", not "Christian metallers", in this review, which means it doesn't support metal as a genre for this band (unlike the second one). The problem is exactly the same with Every Day Life : this source mentions a metal genre (rap metal), but the other one only describes the album (not even the band) as a "a tough blend of punk, rap and metal" which, again, doesn't support metal as a genre for this band. However it clearly says the band plays Christian music. Synthwave.94 (talk) 17:48, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

As WP:SYNTH says, "do not combine different parts of one source to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by the source", which is exactly what you're doing with those two bands, 3family6. And this is the reason why I decided to add a note for both of them. Synthwave.94 (talk) 17:51, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm not engaging in WP:SYNTH. Where are you getting that idea from? The AllMusic review for Burden of a Day does call the band "Christian rockers," but also says that the band's sound is a mix of melodic metalcore and screamo/post-hardcore. Does that mean that we disqualify every source that refers to a metal band as "rockers" or "rock," even if it mentions the band playing metal elsewhere in the source? Metal is rock, so making that kind of statement isn't inconsistent at all. As for EDL, that source is even more explicit, as it says that on the album, the band is "a tough blend of punk, rap and metal described as 'power rhyme'." This is pretty explicit, and since the band is described in another source as rap metal, and the album is representative of the band's style as a whole (meaning that it isn't a case of one album out of ten or something like that), why should this source be disqualified as supporting both the band's Christian affiliation (whether chosen or assigned by critics) and the band's mix of rap, punk, and metal? If it does help resolve this, I found another source for Burden of a Day that supports both metalcore and a Christian affiliation. I couldn't find another for EDL that does both, but that's harder to search for.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:04, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

A mix of several genres doesn't necessarily mean the band is metal. Burden of a Day is explicitly described as Christian rock band, but the same review doesn't say they play metalcore; it says they play a style which "falls somewhere between the melodic metalcore of All That Remains and Killswitch Engage and softer emo/screamo leanings à la the Bled and Thursday". Can you see the difference? For EDL, the Cross Rhythms review only describes their album Disgruntled as "a tough blend of punk, rap and metal", not the band, which only plays "Christian music". It doesn't necessarily means EDL is a Christian punk, Christian rap or Christian metal band. Again it's a WP:SYNTH issue. Of course, by combining these sources with other sources, you can conclude they are Christian metal bands, but these two sources alone are not enough and should not be used in the list to support "metal". Synthwave.94 (talk) 18:21, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

I can see your point about the Burden of a Day review, and I'll replace that one with a more clear example. Regarding EDL, though, there is a clear consensus on musician lists that an album review, whether describing the album or the artist, is sufficient for listing an artist under that genre label, unless it is demonstrated that the review is minority or fringe viewpoint or of a compilation or something to that effect. If you wish to challenge this consensus, then please bring the topic up for discussion at a major talk page venue, such as WikiProject Albums or WikiProject Music.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 19:28, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

An album review is never enough to prove a band belongs to a specific, unless the review you decide to use include such sentences as "the third album by the Christian metallers", "this album sees the band moving from Chistian metalcore to Christian punk", etc. Otherwise it doesn't. A band may change its musical style throughout its career and a specific genre may be misrepresentative of its overall genre (eg. Slayer releasing one nu metal album, Diabolus in Musica, even if the band is always associated with thrash metal). Anyway I've just removed the Cross Rhythms reference and used the Rapzilla source instead to support the fact it's a Christian band. Synthwave.94 (talk) 19:58, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

I think you found a good resolution to our conflict with the Rapzilla source. Your point about Diabolus in Musica is EXACTLY what I had in mind with my comment "the album is representative of the band's style as a whole (meaning that it isn't a case of one album out of ten or something like that)." With EDL, since another source calls EDL "rap metal," we know that the mention of "metal" in a review of Disgruntled isn't an isolate case, and reviews of the other albums support that. Again, your statement that "an album review is never enough to prove a band belongs to a specific [genre]" is not supported by consensus. I've had this discussion with you multiple times before, and every time, other editors, not just myself, consistently disagree with you. If you want to push for a change in that consensus, the Christian metal list is not a place to do that. Go to the albums or music WikiProjects if you want to make that case. I'm glad that in this particular instance, we were able to come to a resolution, but please stop being pointy and establish a new consensus.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 04:26, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Fly, Robin, Fly

Thank you for your edits. As I am a user from Hong Kong which I usually edit in the Chinese Wikipedia, I seldom make edits in other Wikipedias. Thanks for letting me know some of the rules and obligations in English Wikipedia.

Also, glad to see someone who has similar music taste with me (ABBA, AC/DC, Silver Convention, Blondie)! Will629 (talk) 05:22, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

@Will629: I know I answer a bit late but don't worry, there are plenty of users who make mistakes. I've understood your edits were made in good faith. Synthwave.94 (talk) 18:07, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm glad to see you took the time to take a look at my user page. I just want to let you know it's a small overview of what I listen to. Synthwave.94 (talk) 18:07, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

@Synthwave.94: Thank you again! Will629 (talk) 09:35, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For your extensive cleanup of post-disco song articles :) Dan56 (talk) 06:57, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your support, Dan56 ! Synthwave.94 (talk) 21:00, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Found sources for PM5K, Rob Zombie, Spider One, PM5K discography.

Hello Synthwave.94, I found a huge variety of sources to prove that PM5K are nu metal and Rob Zombie as well. I have no idea how to add references so can you help me with this? Thanks! I'm also glad to find a fellow editor who loves nu metal! (STARR65 (talk) 08:10, 2 August 2016 (UTC)); STARR65 (talk) 08:10, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

@STARR65: I just restored nu metal in these articles, as it was removed by an IP adress. Regarding how you can add references in an article, you can use :

• Template:Cite news (for newspapers)
• Template:Cite web (for a website)
• Template:Cite book (for a book, an encyclopedia,...)
• Template:Cite AV media notes (for liner notes from an album,...)

Synthwave.94 (talk) 16:07, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

@Synthwave.94: Thanks! Nu Metal for life! (:

List of psychedelic rock artists

Hello, Synthwave. I saw your responses in the talk page of list of psychedelic rock artists and you seem to know what you are talking about unlike some others. And thank you for your helpful comments in the talk page and your support. I created the list more than half a decade ago (with limited online sources back in those days) and since then it grew nicely and I watched the list over the years, as many other editors did.

You know about the current activity happening in the list and I wanted to ask you kindly if you could update the references and remove the issues template once done, only if you had the time. I have stopped editing long ago and I do not have the luxury of spending time in Wikipedia any more.

But, I had a look at that references on Allmusic. References 1, 25 and 100 are sort of broken, well, Allmusic must have changed their page style because it seems now that top psych rock bands list page is gone and it only displays genres page. I would start with those bands that were referenced with them links. You could maybe use this page [2], or maybe this [3] only for a start. I would also appreciate if you could let me know if you can't find any reference for some bands in that list, then I try and help you.

By the way, the neo-psychedelia section of the list has been removed by that editor and they created a whole new page with it. Ha. Could you even do that when the case in talk page was closed in favor of the article and its scope? Anyway, I already created a new section for later years but sure it needs to be improved. I only added two bands that came to my mind right away that are surely psych rock bands. The other editors would start adding soon, forsure.

And one more thing I want to add: I ask for help from you as I see you enjoy editing in list pages and you seem to be very good at it. Thanks in advance, even if you refuse to edit the list. Cheers! ~ Elitropia (talk) 17:47, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

@Elitropia: Hello.

First of all thank you for your suggestion, I completly forgot about that list !

Yes I often clean up and improve music-related lists, as you can see on my user page. I already started looking for sources to improve the list, but I didn't finish yet. It often takes me a couple of days (and to be honest I'm currently a bit busy in real life). Ilovetopaint is right about the AllMusic sidebars issue, as they are known to be unreliable. However they can be easily changed with other sources (books, articles from music magazines, etc.)

Regarding the neo-psychedelia section removed by Ilovetopaint, I can tell you the best thing to do is to restore a section titled "Later years", with artists from 80s to today explicitly associated with the psychedelic rock genre (see the list of psychedelic pop artists if you don't understand what I'm talking about). I also intended to create the list of neo-psychedelia artists, but Ilovetopaint did it before me.

Anyway, I would greatly improve the list of psychedelic rock artists as soon as possible. Thanks again for your suggestion, I rarely see stuff like this on my talk page.

Cheers ! Synthwave.94 (talk) 18:47, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

I did already create the later years section (mid 1970s to present), that editor already deleted it just now! I recreated the section but I might need you to jump in quick (maybe with an edit or two only) so they might see the necessity of the subsection. And they did not create a new list of neo-psychedelia, they basically copied and pasted what I created as a subsection in the main pysch rock list.

Thanks again. It is my pleasure to talk with someone who actually knows something about what they contribute to! ~ Elitropia (talk) 18:54, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

It seems to me that a massive clean up edit is what Ilovetopaint needs to stop their pointy edits. I did the same thing for other lists and they completly stopped editing them afterwards. ;)

And thanks for trusting me ! Synthwave.94 (talk) 19:12, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Excellent job! It is looking all up to date : ) It is missing great deal of true psychedelic rock bands/artists yet but I will add them back as I find sources and time. I appreciate what you did there with the list. But I have one questions to you, do you mind if I were to put back its old content font style (this: [4]? I think it is looking a bit poor when these sub sections have only one or two band. And I found the old stye neat and a lot more easy to edit. Do you mind? Thanks! ~ Elitropia (talk) 20:28, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

@Elitropia: I tried keeping as many entries as possible, but most of them were unfortunately badly sourced. However, as I didn't finish looking up for sources to complete the list, I may find sources to restore them in the list. Synthwave.94 (talk) 21:52, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Some of the sources you added in the article are either unreliable or didn't explicitly call the artists "psychedelic rock" so I had to remove or change them. I also restored the "old style", as it's true they are not enough artists to add numerous sub-sections for now (unlike the list of blues rock musicians for example). Synthwave.94 (talk) 21:55, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Great job Synthwave. I absolutely love what you are doing with the list. Tho, one could leave the references added as support and the Erkin Koray ones I added definitely mentioned the psych rock, because that is why I added them. Anyhow, I think you deserve a wee barnstar! Let me go find one for you. And by the way, I put the contents in the really old style for the sake of easy editing, and I must admit I like it more that way. Cheers! ~ Elitropia (talk) 18:31, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Here is the barnstar I picked for you. Have a great day! ~ Elitropia (talk) 18:43, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

		The Music Barnstar
		Thank you for the hard work on editing and fixing the music related lists. Keep up the good work! ~ Elitropia (talk) 18:43, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

@Elitropia: Thank you very much for your support, Elitropia ! Synthwave.94 (talk) 23:06, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you!!

Thanks a lot for cleaning up the List of Second British Invasion Artists when I tried putting up U2 (since they are mentioned on the sources), I had a pretty hard time this morning trying to add them and I really appreciate it that you fixed it!! :) --73.240.105.185 (talk) 20:15, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Two Questions

Just two questions concerning some of your edits:

• 1. How are YouTube and iTunes not reliable sources?
• 2. What are some music sources that are considered reliable? DBZFan30 (talk) 10:53, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

• 1 see WP:RS and WP:ALBUMAVOID
• 2 I removed several music websites from HIM because:

they didn't explicitly associate HIM with a genre (for example, I remember one of them only described one of their album as gothic rock)

they are user-generated, as for most MusicMight bios. Synthwave.94 (talk) 18:57, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

BPI Certified Awards

Thanks for highlighting that the thresholds for certification changed in 1989! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Giovanni-PSV (talk • contribs) 11:26, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for clarifying the "Right Round" edit I made--didn't know interpolation was the word for that! :) - Melodyschamble (talk) 19:05, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

@Melodyschamble: No problem at all. It seems to me you learnt something new today. :) Synthwave.94 (talk) 00:15, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi

I added two new entries (Can't Stop the Feeling! and Mirrors) to Talk:List of best-selling singles in order to be added to the article, please check them out. Regards. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 20:01, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

List of Christian metal artists

Hey man, I appreciate the work you do on the List of Christian metal artists. Though I would like correct the Justifide incident. The article did say Christian rock but it also went so far to call them rapcore and nu-metal, therefore calling them Christian nu-metal. Anyways thank you. Metalworker14 (Yo) 9:15, November 10, 2016 (UTC)

@Metalworker14: I'm sorry but the source doesn't explicitly call the band "rapcore or nu metal". Synthwave.94 (talk) 19:09, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Electro/Electrohouse

Per this edit. Pardon my ignorance! Thanks for keeping me honest. I'll be more careful in the future. Happy editing! Ajpolino (talk) 18:58, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

@Ajpolino: No problem at all, I perfectly understood your edit was made in good faith. Synthwave.94 (talk) 19:09, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Disco-pop

Is disco-pop related to disco? I found these.[5][6][7][8][9][10][11] 183.171.182.126 (talk) 15:00, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello. After taking a look at these sources, it seems to me that "disco-pop" is related to disco, even if songs released in the 1980s were also described as "disco-pop". Also note that this Michael Jackson biography is a Wikipedia mirror. Synthwave.94 (talk) 20:10, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

Just wanted to thank you for your tireless and thankless work with music genres. Doctorhawkes (talk) 23:44, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

@Doctorhawkes: Thank you very much for your support. ^^ Synthwave.94 (talk) 13:24, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Killyourstereo.com

Hi, do you know this website? It seems a questionable/self-publish blog via "References" section as notably appeared on One More Light (song). I told several users but they ignore or did not figure it out. Could you still do so? 115.164.176.2 (talk) 19:26, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

@115.164.176.2: Well that's what I thought first, but after doing some research, I found out that Kill Your Stereo is an "independent Australian music website". However I still think there are better sources than this website to use in music articles. Synthwave.94 (talk) 20:41, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

45Cat

Hi Synthwave.94. I just saw your edit summary here. I wonder could you provide me with a link to where that has been agreed at WP:RSN, or elsewhere? Many thanks for your help. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:56, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

@Martinevans123: 45cat is just like Discogs : an unreliable, user-generated source (and Discogs is listed under WP:ALBUMAVOID). Synthwave.94 (talk) 22:14, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

That's a fair personal view. I expect many would say the same. But I was wondering if you were basing your judgement on written policy or on a personal comparison. You don't think images of labels, with category numbers clearly printed on them, are in some way inherently more reliable? I was just wondering if the question had ever been asked at WP:RSN. It seems it has not. I tried searching the archive over there and could not find anything. I think maybe it at lest deserves some discussion. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:38, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

@Martinevans123: I'm not the first one to say so, as I've already seen other users calling 45cat an unreliable source, but I just can't remember where, considering I don't spend as much time on Wikipedia as before. If I can find a link then I'd show you. Synthwave.94 (talk) 22:46, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

I'm happy to ask at WP:RSN, if you think that will help clarify. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:57, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

I asked. There is some discussion. Cheers. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:55, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

@Martinevans123: As Sergecross73 said, it is already listed under WP:ALBUMAVOID, meaning it's not a reliable source. Synthwave.94 (talk) 22:00, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes, it is. And I think that's too blunt. I agree with what Walter said. See also comment at WP:RSN from User:Chubbles. Cheers. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:09, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

@Martinevans123: Nope, as per WP:ALBUMAVOID. Synthwave.94 (talk) 02:11, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

The advice says: "This may include other general wiki-style sites such as Wikia, and product-related sites such as 45cat.com." How do you interpret that "may"? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:57, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Category:Modern Talking

If you dont like the category I chose please choose another. Categories cannot be left orphaned. Rathfelder (talk) 19:36, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

@Rathfelder: It is already under Wikipedia categories named after German musical groups, so where is the problem ? Synthwave.94 (talk) 19:38, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

That is a hidden category It doesnt count. I dont see why you think Category:German synthpop groups inappropriate. Rathfelder (talk) 19:40, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

@Rathfelder: Well Category:Accept (band), Category:Can (band) and probably many other similar categories don't seem to be categorized either, and I don't see any actual problem with it. Synthwave.94 (talk) 19:46, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

The categorisation system is heirarchical. They will all be categorised shortly. Rathfelder (talk) 19:47, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

You're Invited!

Hello Synthwave.94! We are looking for editors to join WikiProject Women in music, an outreach effort which aims at improving articles about women music on Wikipedia. We thought you might be interested, and hope that you will join us. Thank you!

Update of record sales

Hi Synthwave.94, I believe that the record sales of both Bad and Dangerous should be updated: Sources claiming Bad sold 35 million (even 45 million) were stated before 2017, in 2017 it was certified Diamond in the US meaning an extra 1 million was officially added to its sales so logically I think the worldwide sales figure should be up to 36 million. With Dangerous, it has sources from 10 years ago (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/michael-jackson/5648176/Michael-Jacksons-best-selling-studio-albums.html) stating it had sold 32 million, in 2018 it was certified 8x Platinum in the US meaning that the updated worldwide sales figure should be up to 33 million. This also happened with Thriller which was at 65 million and went up to 66 million once it received another certification in the US. What do you think? Isaacsorry (talk) 12:04, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

@Isaacsorry: It really depends on what you can find. As far as the sources you add are reliable, you update record sales of both albums. Synthwave.94 (talk) 15:20, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Alice N Chains

Thanks for helping with the situation! Category adder (talk) 18:01, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

@Category adder: That's what I'm here for. Synthwave.94 (talk) 22:25, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

😁 Category adder (talk) 08:41, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Request

Hi Synthwave.94. In Can't Get You Out of My Head, I added ref says dance-pop which is more accurate than dance music which is an umbrella term. However that user added again a sourced genre and says "Added again a sourced genre, previously removed without reason". I don't really know what to say. 2402:1980:82E6:9C48:EEF7:9336:A647:4906 (talk) 14:47, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

@2402:1980:82E6:9C48:EEF7:9336:A647:4906: Well, even if I agree with you, "dance" is actually correctly sourced and is described as a "sparse, mid-tempo dance number" by AllMusic. I suggest you start a discussion on the article talk page and to reach a consensus first before removing the genre again. Synthwave.94 (talk) 17:42, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Chinese source

Hi, i saw your edit here. I also agree. And I see this source was used in List of best-selling albums in China; do you have any idea if is acceptable? or maybe is neccesary open a discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard or a WikiProject? I'm aware his main contribuitor argued is "reliable". Regards, --Apoxyomenus (talk) 19:35, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

@Apoxyomenus: I already made a request for indefinite semi-protection. As far as I can say, y.saoju.net is a website about new digital albums and concert informations. I can't find anything about record sales or equivalent track streams, so I'm guessing the website is unreliable, just like chartmasters.org. Synthwave.94 (talk) 20:19, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, is fine request a protection for the list. And in regards, y.saoju.net I believe should be appropriate may open a discussion in a Music WikiProject or in the WP:RSN page. --Apoxyomenus (talk) 21:13, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I've noticed you are consistently reverting edits made by others on [12]. This is alll based on your belief that y.saoju.net is not a reliable source. Yet you have not provided any evidence of the sources' unreliability or had any discussions about it on the article's talk page. This website clearly states that it is recording the sales of various singles and albums, and it is what is used in China to record sales data. I'm not sure why you think the source is unreliable, but right now you are engaging in edit wars. This would be much better solved with a discussion on the talk page with you providing evidence as to why the source in unreliable. You have stated that the website does not say anything about record sales, however, it clearly does. [13] 各平台销售详情 = Sales details of each music platform (in this case regarding the song Spot Light). It uses data from Chinese music streaming/purchasing sites such as QQmusic and NetEase Cloud Music. http://y.saoju.net/szzj/artist/294/ 总销量 = total sales. You may have based your opinion on google translate using the word "album", however, the song is definitely a single, as can be proven here by it's entry into [14]. The site also tracks the sales of other singles. Official news articles also refer to this website to track chinese sales as seen here [15] "The song Light has already earned 101 million yuan (RM60.8 million) in total sales according to official numbers that can be found on the website Saoju." and here [16] in regards to a different song.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cranberrie.sauce (talk • contribs) 07:59, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

@Cranberrie.sauce: In case you didn't know, there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Record charts#QQ Music & saoju.net regarding the reliability of y.saoju.net. Considering you provided a better source than this website (in this case, this article from the Malay Mail), "Spotlight" can stay on the list of best-seeling singles. Synthwave.94 (talk) 00:31, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

I've seen the discussion. No one in that discussion has actually explained why Saoju is unreliable or provided any evidence that demonstrates it is. Until that time, the website should still be considered reliable. This website is already being used in the Top Chinese Singles page and has already been discussed as reliable. If you really think it's unreliable, you might as well delete that whole page. I'm not sure why you think Malay Mail is a "better source" than Saoju when Malay Mail explicitly uses Saoju for it's information. The Malay Mail article only proves that Saoju is an official source for record sales in China. Futhermore, the Malay Mail figures are now old as it was written in May of 2020, and the single has sold more copies since that time. Up to date figures are only available on Saoju.net. Again, please explain why you think the source is unreliable before reverting edits, since I've noticed that several other users are in disagreement with you. I don't want to assume bad faith, but this constant back and forth is disruptive. If you are going to insist on reverting every edit, I would still suggest it would be better and less disruptive for you to raise the question of reliability yourself on the article's talk page before reverting, so the other editors can see.

Saoju shouln't be considered reliable, unless a general opinion in WP:RS prove otherwise, as i'ts a blog (which are most of the time unreliable as per WP:BLOGS/WP:NEWSBLOG). The whole page is already backed by reliable sources and doesn't extra require sources whose status is unclear. The Malay Mail is more reliable as it is a secondary source, while is not the case of Saoju. Also, you seem to forget that Pakinaka is a sockmaster, while trusted user Binksternet already reverted you a week ago. In other words, you cannot say that your changes are consensual. Synthwave.94 (talk) 01:29, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Glam metal bands and artist

Hey, can you check my recent edits on the list of glam metal bands and artists, I need someone to make sure they're productive and reliably sourced Category adder :D (talk) 18:49, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Reliable source for UK release date of "Total Eclipse of the Heart"

Dear Synthwave.94,

Thanks for your recent cleanup on the article Total Eclipse of the Heart. I especially appreciate your commitment to making sure the infobox content is backed up with a reliable source. I notice you amended the release date to match the US version, with the RIAA as a reference. I believe I have found a reliable source for the UK release date too. If you visit https://www.bpi.co.uk/brit-certified/ and under the 'Certified Awards Search' heading, search "Bonnie Tyler", and you'll see a list of her certifications along with a release date of 11 February 1983. Is this reliable enough? If so, how would we best cite this? I presume it would require adding some written instructions into the reference.

All best wishes! Skyrack95 (talk) 17:11, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

@Skyrack95: The only release dates I can find on BPI.co.uk are 1 January 2001, which seems to be an error, considering that the single was certified Gold on 1 March 1983, and 14 November 2004 (perhaps for digital downloads). Elsewhere, I also found 11 February 1983 (UK), April 1983 (Australia) and 21 May 1983 (Japan) (under "Tracks"). Synthwave.94 (talk) 14:34, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

@Synthwave.94: Good point. I hadn't noticed the error. The correct release date (11.02.1983) only seems to show in the search results. If you search "Bonnie Tyler" in the Certified Awards Search, and click "load more", you will see the correct release date displayed under the far right column. The Austrian Charts website works just as well; maybe this is cause for a 'release history' table at the bottom of the article? They're commonplace on album pages, but not sure how widely used they are in articles for songs. Skyrack95 (talk) 15:29, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Edits to composition

Thanks for this. Very few of their mass edits are sourced in the body hence my mass reversion. I had hoped that someone such as yourself would revert where appropriate. Robvanvee 14:19, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

@Robvanvee: I perfectly understand that you didn't take a look at each edit from Mdgds you reverted so far, and this is the reason why I assumed good faith regarding your edits. Synthwave.94 (talk) 14:34, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

You Spin Me deletion

Hey, concerning your deletion on You_Spin_Me_Round_(Like_a_Record), WP:Songcover provides 2 guidelines. One refers to WP:Notability_(music)#Songs which defines when a song merits its own page (the section on Dope's cover and line on Gigi d'Agostino's cover does not meet this standard; it is only given 1 sentence in an album review). The second (which I think both meet thru their 1 sentence - maybe you disagree) is:

"the rendition is discussed by a reliable source, showing that it is noteworthy in its own right. Merely appearing in an album track listing, a discography, etc., is not sufficient to show that a cover version is noteworthy; cover songs with only these types of sources should not be added to song articles, either as prose or in a list."

These criteria mean the Jessica Simpson section and sentence on the Danzel cover must be deleted or tagged for missing references. (WP:Notability_(music)#Songs: ranking on national/significant music/sales charts "indicates only that a song may be notable, not that it is notable.") If you agree, I can hunt to see if any of the deleted or to-be-deleted covers have reviews to justify inclusion.

Also, can you discuss this on the relevant talk page section for the article so we no longer have people posting about this?

P.S. - "Album Review: Flo Rida". MTV. 3 May 2009. Retrieved 1 November 2016. is now missing from the cited MTV page

Thanks! Skingski (talk) 18:30, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@Skingski: Dope's, Jessica Simpson's and Danzel's versions meet WP:SONGCOVER and WP:NSONG, as all of them charted. Synthwave.94 (talk) 18:45, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Apologies for reiterating my quotes from the wiki sites you reference too, they say:

WP:SONGCOVER: "When a song has been recorded or performed by more than one artist, a particular artist's rendition should be included in the song's article (never in a separate article), but only if at least one of the following applies:

the rendition is discussed by a reliable source, showing that it is noteworthy in its own right. Merely appearing in an album track listing, a discography, etc., is not sufficient to show that a cover version is noteworthy; cover songs with only these types of sources should not be added to song articles, either as prose or in a list.

the rendition itself meets the notability requirement at WP:NSONGS."

WP:NSONGS - "Songs and singles are probably notable if they have been the subject[1] of multiple,[2] non-trivial[3] published works..."

I interpret the "multiple" works to be relevant only for a standalone article on the cover song vs this situation (but WP:SONGCOVER: "a particular artist's rendition should be included in the song's article (never in a separate article)").

"Any of the following factors suggest that a song or single may be notable enough that a search for coverage in reliable independent sources will be successful.

1. Has been ranked on national or significant music or sales charts. (Note again that this indicates only that a song may be notable, not that it is notable.)"

These sections say charting is not automatically sufficient for notability. Dope is notable as it charted and was covered in an article though briefly. However with no article establishing Jessica Simpson or Danzel's versions as notable, I feel it's a legit judgment call that they stay. But it sounds like Simpson, Danzel, Hyperbubble, etc. should be included if they are discussed in an article.

If they weren't important enough to be reviewed, then prolly not notable even if they charted - but I find it hard to believe no one would review charted songs.

A cheeseburger for you!

Thanks for helping me become a better editor by reverting my edits when they're poorly sourced, it's really helped me learn how to edit more professionally with minimal mistakes, thanks! Category adder :D (talk) 23:18, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@Category adder: Thank you ! Considering you seem to edit music articles as well, I suggest you reading the whole WP:MUSIC/SOURCES page which is, I think, a good place to start for a newcomer like you. Synthwave.94 (talk) 23:32, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion, I'll be sure to read the entire thing! Category adder :D (talk) 23:35, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

List of Second British Invasion artists

Care to explain exactly how an academic work written by a highly recognized specialist in the subject [17] and printed by the University of Michigan Press is a "bad source", like you expressed as rationale for your removal of content at List of Second British Invasion artists? 2.139.51.168 (talk) 17:22, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

@2.139.51.168: I never said it was an unreliable source, I simply checked the source and I didn't find anything saying the bands you added to the list were not explicitly associated with the Second British Invasion. Please read and understand WP:STICKTOSOURCE. Synthwave.94 (talk) 17:29, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Do you happen to own a copy of the afforementioned book, or bought and downloaded a full copy at Google Books? Otherwise, you would have not been able to check the proper chapter II where the period is analyzed by Cateforis. Simply checking the small summary available at the Google Books preview would noy suffice. Not just the ones I added, but also several British music acts are detailed as such by Cateforis, so I find it hard to believe that you actually "read the source". 2.139.51.168 (talk) 17:43, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Table captions are a requirement now per MOS:ACCESS

Hi. In your "clean up" edit to Beat Box (Art of Noise song), I noticed you removed the table caption from the chart performance wikitable. All tables are required to have a caption per MOS:ACCESS (more specifically WP:DTAB). There was a discussion of this and there was a consensus that they all need one. Even the small ones. Thanks. Ss112 10:57, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

@Ss112: That's OK, I didn't know chart tables needed captions. Synthwave.94 (talk) 14:39, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Alphaville's documentary: The Story of Forever Young

It's clear from the Alphaville's official documentary "The Story of Forever Young" closing credits (see at 59:17), who wrote what and who directed which video. Sportomanokin (talk) 15:29, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

@Sportomanokin: See Template:Cite AV media if you want to cite a video. Synthwave.94 (talk) 15:40, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Templates

What are the reasons for this edit? — Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 20:23, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Mikhail Ryazanov: Why not ? A template exists and I don't see any reason not to use it. Synthwave.94 (talk) 21:31, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

"Why not" is not a good reason to change something, especially if the change is not an improvement. In particular, {{nbsp}} is longer than   in the source code, puts more stress on the parser, and cannot be used in wikilinks. So there must be some explicit reason to change the lighter and more universal   (also, easily insertable from the toolbar) to this {{nbsp}}. Did you have it?

And my question also included your deletion of spaces before the first parameters of {{cite web}}. This is really counterproductive because unspaced constructions like {{cite web|first=... often get wrong linebreaks in the editor:

...{{cite
web|first=...

whereas {{cite web |first=... with a space has a chance of being displayed more readably:

...{{cite web 
|first=...

"Why not" also doesn't count here. — Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 22:22, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Mikhail Ryazanov: I understand your point of view, but I prefer using appropriate templates when it's possible to do so and using spaces for readibility purposes, as I always edit articles through the source code, and not through an editor. Synthwave.94 (talk) 22:38, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

By "editor" I did mean the source-code editor. It cannot break lines at the "|" symbol, so putting a space before it makes the source code more readable.   is also more readable in the source code, especially with syntax highlighting. — Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 23:06, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

So, there's no way?

Hi, since you keep forcibly reverting my good faith edits trying to specify the genre of the remix of that track since both versions differs, am I to consider that there is absolutely no way to prove to you that the remix is a difference genre whatsoever? Please do consider that it was 2005 at the time, I perfectly well know it to be electro house because it fall under that category for all qualifications, but you for some reason insist we be 100% super duper specific and, sincerely, there's no way to prove its genre at this point. I swear to scientist ever wrote an entire article dedicated to this specific remix of this specific track (which would be ridiculous as heck) just to prove to you, good sir, that this track is an electro house remix. I know it to be true, I asked to address me directly in case of questions, apparently, all you prefer to do is to revert my edits, so... I have 0 proof at this point. Forgive me, Vinylshakerz, I know you are good guys and all, but here I can't justify your style, unfortunately. So I don't know that genre you made your music in at the time, sorry again. Such is life. --Whydoesitfeelsogood (talk) 05:04, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

@Whydoesitfeelsogood: I understand your actions, but none of the sources you added so far are considered reliable. You really need to be familiar with WP:RS and WP:USERGENERATED/WP:BLOG. I also suggest you reading WP:MUSIC/SOURCE, especially WP:NOTRSMUSIC. Synthwave.94 (talk) 12:44, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, only one question then: what sources state that there is a remix of that song by Vinylshakerz in the article? I only see sources about charts rating. How do we know what label it was released under? We don't either, right? It's just been added there like that by someone. --Whydoesitfeelsogood (talk) 14:33, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Jethro Tull - category

Hello, I see you've changed Jethro Tull's category from British to English folk rock. I've reverted it given that Ian Anderson's own declared nationality is British plus they have not exclusively featured English musicians. Stroness (talk) 09:32, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Synthwave.94. Also Scritti Politti? You know Green Gartside is Welsh, don't you? What's your criterion exactly? Martinevans123 (talk) 09:47, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

@Stroness and Martinevans123: Jethro Tull comes from Luton ([18]), is explicitly described as an English band by sources such as the Los Angeles Times ([19]), the Houston Press ([20]) or BroadwayWorld ([21]), and is even already categorized under English progressive rock groups, English blues rock musical groups and English hard rock musical groups. On the other hand, Scritti Politti formed in Leeds ([22]) and, as expected, is also described as an English band ([23] or [24]) and is categorized under English new wave musical groups. It doesn't matter that the band members come from Scotland, Wales, or whatever else, as both of these bands come from England, and it does make sense to keep a consistency between all of the categories of the same article. Synthwave.94 (talk) 12:58, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. Yes, I guess Scritti Politti will have been described as "English", especially in the USA. where "England" often seems to be used synonymously with "United Kingdom". I'm pretty sure I could find an equal number of sources that describe them as "British" and/or as a "UK Band". And yes, Leeds is in England, but I'm really not sure that Scritti Politti were ever known as "a band from Leeds". They only signed to Rough Trade and found commercial success after they had moved to London. I'd also say that, for very many bands that originate in the UK, their success comes from what might more accurately be described as the "UK music scene" and the "UK pop charts", not the "English music scene" and the "English pop charts" (which don't really exist). I also think that Categories should always follow the text, not necessarily follow other Categories. Thanks anyway. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:29, 5 April 2021 (UTC) p.s. founder member Nial Jinks also went to Croesyceiliog School.

Undid revision of adding Splash to Eurodance artists

Funny Input, but not really helpfull, by just deleting the entrance. I'm not used about the 'english' regularities - I have built an article for the german Wikipedia und while it was declared as 'stub' here, I brought up the same version in english. Now, as you say by your handling, that you know, how it has to be, WHY don't you do it right, instead of just blocking the input? --Jörg Lenau (talk) 08:53, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

@Jörg Lenau: I don't know how the German Wikipedia works, but I do know that Eurokdj is not considered a reliable source as per this past discussion. It's a self-published website, as confirmed by the Karine Sanche herself ("I am the ONE AND ONLY person responsible for the updates, graphics and coding"). Synthwave.94 (talk) 14:03, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Dear @Synthwave.94:, you just miss the point. My question was and is: why did you (have you been it?) delete my whole entry and tell me, what is wrong within this, instead of deleting JUST, what is wrong (the reference!) and leave the base (the link to Splash)? I'm really not in the mood, to get into this whole stuff within the english Wikipedia also - I'm only preparing for the german version. I bring in 'an input' and that's all. If you guys are only sitting there and awaiting for your expectations, than it is that way - not my way! --Jörg Lenau (talk) 17:09, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

@Jörg Lenau: I reverted you because Eurokdj is not a reliable source and that badly sourced/unsourced can be removed as per WP:V and WP:RS. You can of course add Splash back in the list if you're able to find a more reliable source explicitly describing this group as Eurodance. Synthwave.94 (talk) 17:19, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Unbelievable no F-word

Dear Synthwave.94 I see you reverted my comment about the sample in Unbelievable. I am the writer of the song, look me up. I wanted to set the record straight on this. Maybe you could help me by checking I have expressed it correctly as your are obviously experienced on Wikipedia but please don't remove the comment. Best Ian Dench

@Iandench: It doesn't work like this. If you want to keep your changes to the article, you need a reliable source. Spin explicitly says that "Unbelievable" features a sample of a Black Panther Party member shouting "What the fuck?", not "What the ... was that". I therefore suggest you to find an article taken from a music magazine (Rolling Stone, Spin, Smash Hits,...) or even an interview of EMF. Synthwave.94 (talk) 14:42, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

I get that wiki is more authentic with reliable sources but as the writer aren't I the most reliable source? That needs to be verified I hear you say? Is there any way I can be verified as an authentic source regarding this subject?

We will make an announcement on the band's official website, will this count as reliable?

@Iandench: I'm sorry but you're not a reliable source per se, and "official" websites hardly count as reliable sources as well. However, an interview where you explain the use of a sample in "Unbelievable" can be used as a source in the song's article as per WP:PRIMARY. Also, be careful about conflicts of interest, as you've already edited your own article as well. Synthwave.94 (talk) 13:02, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I am slowly getting to grips with this and it does seem to make sense for the cause of accuracy.

The fallacy about the f-word comes from a time when we courted the controversy and everyone wanted to interview us. These days we are not so interesting to 'reputable' magazines so an interview may be difficult. I will try however as it really is time to set the record straight (pardon the pun) and until I do the Wikipedia post about the song will remain frustratingly inaccurate.

Appreciate your guidance.

Ian Iandench (talk) 18:54, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

One learns every day!

I see that much blood was spilled over whether or not to cross the t when referring to tThe Beatles in mid-sentence. ;-) Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 08:16, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Difference between revisions for "What Is Love"

I have observed youtube used as a source repeatedly so I can only guess it is the view count found to be in question. Rather than have a 'battle of edits' I thought it best to discuss this with you. If the previous entry was changed, as follows, would that be acceptable?

EDITED VERSION:

• In 2021, Norwegian metal musician and producer Leo Moracchioli rearranged the song as a video metal cover with Priscila Serrano.

ORIGINAL VERSION:

• In 2021, Norwegian metal musician and producer Leo Moracchioli rearranged the song as a video metal cover with Priscila Serrano. It broke 20,000 views in the first thirty minutes after it premier.

I appreciate your time and dedication to the music.

References

@LukafioWiki: In most cases (including this one), YouTube is not a reliable source (see WP:RSPYT and WP:YOUTUBE-EL) and Leo Moracchioli's cover doesn't meet WP:SONGCOVER. Synthwave.94 (talk) 01:22, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the information; it provided additional details I had not been aware of. ... Please feel free to remove this message if you deem it nessacary.

List of rock performers

Why did you destroy the entire list? I've been working on cleaning it up in my spare time and working on the sources for all of the artists once I get through that. It's not Rock and roll performers, it's rock performers consisting of artist from all subgenres.Pojo54 (talk) 00:16, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Pojo54: As I stated here, the list was completly messed up because of a well-known banned editor called MariaJaydHicky (at least one of her numerous sockpuppets). I didn't "destroy" the list per se, as I restored the last "clean" version of the list, with only rock and roll artists, and with a more appropriate name. Synthwave.94 (talk) 01:55, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I was completely unaware. Sorry, I forgot to check the talk page first. Perhaps I will start working on something new for rock and include references immediately. Thanks for letting me know. Pojo54 (talk) 02:01, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.)

List of rock and roll artists

added links pointing to Johnny Kidd, Jack Scott, Little Tony and Richard Anthony

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Please stop reverting

Look, just because you don't support these changes doesn't mean you should revert them, i actually am contributing. Thanks, SomeWhatLife.

@SomeWhatLife: Read and understand WP:V and WP:OR. You cannot change release dates without using a reliable source. Synthwave.94 (talk) 21:47, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Ok.

Imagine (John Lennon song)

Hello,

the sources of the song sales are already in the article, in the "Certification and sales" section :

Copsey, Rob (19 September 2017). "The UK's Official Chart 'millionaires' revealed". Official Charts Company. Archived from the original on 19 September 2017. Retrieved 5 January 2018.
"British single certifications – John Lennon – Imagine". British Phonographic Industry. Retrieved 28 July 2021.  "American single certifications – John Lennon – Imagine". Recording Industry Association of America. Retrieved 15 September 2021. :

https://www.officialcharts.com/chart-news/the-uks-official-chart-millionaires-revealed__20459/

https://www.bpi.co.uk/award/3259-2886-1

and https://www.riaa.com/gold-platinum/?tab_active=default-award&ar=John+Lennon&ti=Imagine&format=Single&type=#search_section.

So please stop reverting my edit. Coherence is needed : one cannot write in one section that a disc has sold 1.64 million copies and in another section 1.71 million copies.

I am not at ease with indicating the sources in wikipedia so if you know how to repeat the 147th, 148th and 149th references of that article, you may do it. --Carlo Colussi (talk) 21:12, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

@Carlo Colussi: I fixed the song sales for the UK, but removed the US "sales", as certifications and sales are two different things. Synthwave.94 (talk) 02:24, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Michael Jackson

Hi there, I just noticed a recent edit you made on Michael Jackson. Although your contributions are greatly appreciated, you removed Category:20th-century American singers, Category:21st-century American singers, and Category:American contemporary R&B singers, although it says in the 1990s section of the Contemporary R&B article that he was one of the best selling artists in R&B during the 20th-century. Another user tried to restore the categories, but have been reverted again. 2001:569:7F96:EE00:3468:8C65:686C:333F (talk) 06:50, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

List of psychedelic folk artists

Hey there, would you please give some argument on reverting my contribution - adding Galloping Wonderstag - to the list? Thanks! Harom65 (talk) 09:04, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Missing you

Hope you are doing well, wherever you are. Binksternet (talk) 07:54, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Your access to AWB may be temporarily removed

Hello Synthwave.94! This message is to inform you that due to editing inactivity, your access to AutoWikiBrowser may be temporarily removed. If you do not resume editing within the next week, your username will be removed from the CheckPage. This is purely for routine maintenance and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You may regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! — MusikBot II ^talk 17:22, 16 May 2023 (UTC)