Hello, Tbhotch! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place ((helpme)) on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! fetchcomms 04:09, 1 November 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Archives

1.- December 2009 - July 2010 2.- August 2010 - October 2010 3.- November 2010 - January 2011 4.- February 2011 - May 2011 5.- June 2011 - October 2011 6.- November 2011 - December 2011 7.- January 2012 - March 2012 8.- April 2012 - October 2012 9.- November 2012 - February 2013 10.- March 2013 - June 2013 11.- July 2013 - November 2013 12.- December 2013 - December 2014 13.- January 2015 - November 2017 14.- December 2017 - December 2019 15.- January 2020 - December 2020

current board (some unneeded capital letters in positions). fix too please

After considerable research, I went in and made some changes to the Reforma article. I even included a description of what changes I had made and why. The changes were immediately reverted because it "seems to be a test." I assure you, the changes were intentional, well-researched, and cited. Please reconsider or at least explain WHY a good-faith attempt to edit a page would be summarily reverted so I can avoid the issue going forward. Thanks. CapnPhantasm (talk) 21:05, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies. I deleted the categories in my sandbox but didn't realize I had deleted them from the article itself. I'll be more careful going forward. Sorry for the confusion and thanks for the clarification! CapnPhantasm (talk) 21:17, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Redacted)

Whoever changed it, never changed that page. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 20:59, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, I'm not new, but you are aware your edits restore original research and synthesis to the article - a little bit of WP:AGF wouldn't go a miss. I would expect us to both agree that a song needs explicit clarification of its release as a single. That means its needs to be serviced to radio versus simply picking up radio airplay, this is particularly evident especially after an album has come out and there is nothing to stop radio stations from playing album tracks. Anyway I commented at the Pov talkpage too. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 21:42, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gatoclass (talk) 00:04, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

This is a courtesy note given your username appears in some of the edit summaries. CMD (talk) 05:45, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Didn’t you not see the talk page I made? Confetti is clearly a single from the album, despite being a remix. See their other songs Touch, How Ya Doin’, Think About Us, Power, and No More Sad Songs as examples. They got remixes and they are credited as singles off the album. DuaLipaFan23951 (talk) 16:38, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@DuaLipaFan23951: Yes, and you are clearly not understanding what is WP:Consensus. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 16:40, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed that the page Alben Barkley is indefinitely semi-protected but is missing a protection icon. Since this seems to be something you do a lot, can and would you kindly fix that issue on that page? Clevesian (talk) 00:00, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done (CC) Tbhotch^™ 00:06, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, the "new" account taking such a lively interest in your work is a sock of CalebHughes. The IP vandalism causing the protection is also his handiwork, and WP:HAND is one of the tools in his meager collection. Favonian (talk) 14:35, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for the genre changes. I'm well aware of the WP:Policies and guidelines, but I didn't know about the genre changing WP:Sockpuppetry, I was just trying to restore the credits. My understanding (maybe I'm mistaken, if so, tell me) is that, as long as the credits can be sourced from the album jackets, they can be listed in album articles. Unless there's exception(s) to this (and if you could possibly explain, I'd appreciate it) I'm gonna go ahead and restore the sourced credits manually, so as not to conflict with the genre. The source for is the booklet.--2601:153:881:3D60:D934:55AB:54A7:D1E0 (talk) 00:44, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• I posted the accurate sales claim that has yet to be fully disputed. Their is no way the album sold 15 million worldwide, it's at 9 million total globally. Please stop, thank you.Meddymarl (talk) 06:18, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

¿Perdón? ¿No se pueden usar nombres legales si no son comunes? ¿Entonces qué me dices de Bill Gates, Bill Clinton y Joe Biden? Así de fácil se te cae el cuento. De toda la vida el nombre legal va al principio del artículo y el nombre común se pone en el nombre del artículo y en el nombre de la ficha. --BartocX (talk) 18:26, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@BartocX: ¿Tú comprendes que es la significacion de WP:RS? ¿Quel es la diferencia entre las fuentes primaires y secondaires?--Ymblanter (talk) 18:40, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ymblanter: Sí, ya puse otra fuente más usada. Espero que no tenga que poner otra aun más publicitada. --BartocX (talk) 18:44, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

La referencia que acabo de poner fue publicada en el diario de la federación. ¿Ya es lo suficientemente fiable? --BartocX (talk) 18:46, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Está bien.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:48, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sam updated their Brazilian certs, the site is updating everything https://twitter.com/umusicbrasil/status/1387196998697295880?s=21 HengeBoy (talk) 02:53, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Regarding this series edits. While clearly made by a certain individual based on past behavior, they are also examples of the less-than-vandalistic nature of many of their edits. I have reverted all of them on the grounds of "not an improvement" (a matter of opinion), but these changes themselves are not really harmful from what I gather (though probably should gain a consensus for sweeping actions like this). Just wondering on second thought, should we allow these relatively innocuous edits to stand? --DB1729 (talk) 13:24, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, it is written that Nirvana EP by Sam Smith has 4 tracks, but then in the tracklist you write 5 songs. Lay Me Down is not in the tracklist, as you can see on www.discogs.com

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Hi Tbhotch! I wanted to say a thank you for your very significant volume of edits. Particularly, I noticed your tireless work to Mexico City Metro overpass collapse, an important and topical article. Thank you for everything that you do! Bibeyjj (talk) 21:07, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. My goal has always been to inform as many as possible and I honestly didn't think it would be done through the metro stations. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 03:01, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for adding the source for the Line 4 fire. I opted to remove it instead of tagging it. It looks bad if it really was unverifiable and the tag stays on a Main Page article, and it looks bad if someone (you) can quickly find the source (my English search failed). Thanks for all your effort on the page.—Bagumba (talk) 05:53, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Bagumba: this one was there for a few hours; they look bad, but a few of them it's not a major problem. Sometimes editors change the content without updating the sources, and as this one is changing quickly, things get overlooked. In this situation, maintenance tags can be helpful to notice those errors. Regards. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 06:12, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On a related note, I am considering moving the page back to Mexico City Metro overpass collapse per WP:RMUM as an undiscussed move. It seems most English sources refer to it as an "overpass" and even the few that use "viaduct" also include "overpass". "viaduct" seems over WP:PRECISE for the title. Any immedidiate objections?—Bagumba (talk) 06:21, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Bagumba: I have no objections per se, but as it is linked on the main page, people might not completely like it is being moved over and over again. If I'm understanding overpass and viaduct correctly, they are practically the same thing, but most English sources indeed call it an overpass. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 06:32, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the input. I moved it back. Yes, we don't want the churn that was at 2021 Meron stampede; an WP:RM should be opened now if needed.—Bagumba (talk) 08:03, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

or unlock Macri's there is no real reason for the unptrotection of some and protection of others. Please give reasons for the uneven treatment or do as i request FrankRhymez (talk) 03:08, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for getting in touch, regarding my recent changes to some Madonna singles. I would start by saying I have never made any edits or changes here, so, I am new to this, and wasn't sure how to reply to your messages. The changes I have made are according to www.officialcharts.com. This is the company that complies the charts from 1952. The charts can also be viewed in the Virgin Book of Hit Singles. This provides the evidence of the correct release dates of all Madonna singles, taking into account any re-issues and singles not released in North America. Therefore, Crazy For You, Into The Groove, Holiday (first re-issue), Angel, Gambler, Dress You Up. Hope that clarifies that, and I would be very grateful for any help or assistance you can provided in how to edit on Wikipedia. Thank you.

— Maile (talk) 00:03, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Look man, I understand this music better than Wikipedia itself. None of the songs on the latter half of the History album are entirely hip hop even though some have rapping segments, so it's kind of unfair that the genre was called hip hop without paying attention to an actual genre that influenced it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quit42 (talk • contribs) 19:25, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

—— A675974811 (talk) 12:41, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

?? Truthseekernow (talk) 21:56, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that we are not supposed to link to sources that are in violation of anyone's copyright, but the videos that I linked to were on the official YouTube channel of George Stroumboulopoulos, the man who conducted the interviews and hosted The Hour, the show on which the interviews were conducted. You can verify that this really is his channel by going to his official website, which links to the same YouTube channel and even to the same videos. According to WP:COPYLINK and WP:VIDEOLINK, it should be fine to link to these videos because they were uploaded by the creators.

2601:58D:301:C060:7C0E:B694:1983:DC59 (talk) 19:04, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I see you made this move a couple years ago. I'm currently thinking of moving it to Big Bang (single album), as it is the only single album of that name. Would you agree that this makes sense? Thanks! 162 etc. (talk) 15:21, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You sent me a message, what's up? In ictu oculi (talk) 09:21, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@In ictu oculi: The message, which you removed, is clear. For further information refer to Wikipedia:Arbitration. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 17:28, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

---

From R. (album)

@In ictu oculi: One of the things about the internet is that it doesn't forget. You were aware of the parenthesis at Talk:Chuu (single album) and Talk:Tail (song). You have been citing NCM every time you need it, and you have been complaining about NCM since it was modified in 2016. You complained here, here, here and here (of what I have found). You asked at R. (album) and at NCM "How much discussion was there for this change?" Well, if you pay attention it says: "Use "(single album)" for Asian "single albums".[c]" Where "[c]" includes a link to the relevant discussion that took place during 2019. You don't seem to understand what consensus means, and if you do, you attempt to go against it as much as you are able to because you are not invited personally to discuss such changes. And this is also not the case because you were invited and you did participate at the entertainer RFC and you attempted to go against it a few months ago. As a fact, you have never stopped demonstrating your opinions towards the word entertaiment: "should be Madonna (singer) of course, but anything that removes the sycophantic (entertainer) will be an improvement".

You have tried several times to debunk this calling it a "local consensus" despite that a) it is not a WP:localconsensus, and b) it was an RFC that lasted for 2 months in a widely watchlisted page. What is a local consensus? A local consensus is a discussion that determines that similar-themed articles should follow the same style for consistency. That is, how the Beatles articles are to be titled "(Beatles x)" and not "(The Beatles x)". The discussion affects "local" articles (The Beatles-only) and by no means other bands called "The" have to follow it as WP:THEMUSIC has been discussed to a wider extent. This is the same principle of why you can't use the local consensus for books when discussing films or the Fabergé consensus when discussing jewellery.

But the thing here is that you have been WP:gaming the system for years. You did it with Lingdian (WP:A7), Belinda Lima (WP:A7), or Forbidden Fruit (NSONGS). You did it again a few years ago with Rhinoceros (Rhinoceros album) (NALBUM) and Manzanita (singer) (WP:A7), and you keep doing it with articles like Intime (Christophe album) or The Holy Ground (Mary Black album) (both fail NALBUM). But when you are questioned about it, like that time when you attempted to game it with Tal Vez (NSONGS) or with the original version of Như Quỳnh (WP:A7), they are "honest mistakes" that will not happen again because you have learned from your errors. But as soon as you are stopped being "watched" by others, you continue creating questionable articles. And why I am saying this if it is not related to the RM? Because CSD and NMUSIC were built upon consensus, and despite that, you circumvent their policies and guidelines over and over again. You are always finding new ways to evade established consensuses and if you are caught, "you were not aware of them" and you are sorry for the inconveniences. Remember 18...? I do remember 18... How many times you have edited Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (music)? Did you just ignore that big square every time? What makes you believe that that square doesn't apply to you?

But, let's assume that you are truly unaware of these things, it means that you are not paying attention to what is there or that you are selectively paying attention to what you want to read. Now you can't use it anymore as an excuse because now you are aware of them, the guides and the sanctions. The sole reason you have escaped sanctions every time is that people cared more about articles' quantity and not about their quality, but it's not the case nowadays. See this discussion for example. Do you need sanctions like those? To be forced to use the WP:AFC process for every proposal you make? Because stubs like Dehati (Shadmehr Aghili album) are OK... for new users who don't understand how Wikipedia works, but you have been editing for 11 years, you can't shield with WP:STUB anymore. The sole reason I have not AFD them is that you take it personally, the articles suddenly stop being microstubs with no indication of notability, and you conclude the AFD saying that it was nominated in bad faith despite the fact you created them in awful conditions to create that specific reaction.

And lastly, please stop pretending. We both know this is not about consensus—you just attempted to go against the entertainer consensus; or how the albums above are blatant violations of the consensus reached at WP:NMUSIC–, this is actually about how policies and guidelines limit your opinions, as I already demonstrated it above. You question "Was and is there consensus for this {inclusion}?" Answer: Yes, the link you just mentioned before your question. It's a consensus and NCM is a guideline built with a compilation of RFCs, RMs, and talk page discussions that have created consensuses of what to do with specific situations, including the acceptable use of "single albums". Everything at NCM was discussed accordingly and it reflects what to do in the event it is required to avoid users to go and search in several talk pages the answer for their question. If you have opinions against it, well those are your opinions and they alone don't reflect a consensus.

You are not obliged to know every single policy, guideline, or even administrative sanction, but certainly, you should stop attempting to game and bypass those that you are aware of. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 20:46, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

— Maile (talk) 00:03, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate you removing the spam from my talk page, thanks for that WildAGR (talk) 19:40, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I do not know how to talk to you but I think this is the correct way, I would like to inform you that my little brother got on my computer and screwed around on some things, and Wikipedia was one of them, please do not ban me, and could you let me know if there is a possible way for me to be a fact checker or administrator? --Steve1234567891011 (talk) 21:17, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

hey Tbhotch, with regards to Thriller, If you listen to the opening snare hit, that is Jeff Porcaro's snare. We all know he played on the album particularly Human Nature and Beat It, but any music listener, historian knows that sound. I am pretty sure Porcaro played real drums over the drum machine. I can't just call up Quincy Jones or Bob Sweiden (he's dead). Anyways, you just removed the world greatest drummer from one of the worlds greatest songs. My citation is my ear and anyone who KNOWS music KNOWS that was him playing drums at the beginning of Thriller. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.52.105.178 (talk) 02:56, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Thanks for your continued work on articles about public art in CDMX lately. I'm curious if you're aware of any source to use for this fountain/statue of "Baco", which I assume may be Bacchus. Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 02:12, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unrelated, I just created a stub for Nicho Bears and Bar, which I visited in CDMX. I went to King and Macho Dance Bar as well, but not sure if these quality for entries? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 19:13, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Another Believer: Where is that fountain located? For the bars, I only found some passing mentions for both that wouldn't satisfy NCorp. Although there's a popular nightclub in that neighborhood called Rico that might be notable enough. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 20:33, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My CDMX gallery has pictures of Fuente de Cibeles and Parque España before and after the fountain, so around there? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:56, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Another Believer: Thanks. It's a replica of Bacchus (Michelangelo) and it's along Avenida Álvaro Obregón. I only found passing mentions a priori. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 21:02, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tbhotch, Do any of the sources allow you to add mention of the replica in CDMX to Bacchus (Michelangelo)? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:08, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Seems there are other replicas: commons:Category:Replicas of Michelangelo's Bacchus. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:09, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[1][2][3] They all say the same, it's a replica of Bacchus along the avenue, next to Parque España. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 21:28, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tbhotch, Thank you! Very helpful. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:04, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe these sources say Michelangelo, but hopefully someone can improve this over time. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:10, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Michelangelo's name in Spanish is es:Miguel Ángel ("Réplica del Baco, de Miguel Ángel" [4]) (CC) Tbhotch^™ 00:20, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah explaining some stuff. I haven't seen it so I can't tell what does it explain. I should have read about it more. Sorry. If I find a write synopsis can I add it there again? Derjenigederzukunftseht (talk) 20:57, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Tbhotch, the article is already semi-protected. Can you adding pp-vandalism on the article because the article is once again indef semi due to vandalism because admins are not yet adding it to the page. 182.1.6.22 (talk) 19:16, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Because multiple banned and blocked users have requested me to perform edits, I will not respond to further requests from unestablished users. Refer to §Evasion and enforcement for further information." (CC) Tbhotch^™ 23:45, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

a user names "Annaoue" the Taiwan chart number positions (the single) did. could you check if it's normal please? AnthonyFG (talk) 04:23, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

top40-charts.com is not a reliable source. For further information refer to WP:BADCHARTS. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 04:28, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

		Sunshine!
		Hello Tbhotch! Interstellarity (talk) has given you a bit of sunshine to brighten your day! Sunshine promotes WikiLove and hopefully it has made your day better. Spread the sunshine by adding ((subst:User:Meaghan/Sunshine)) to someone else's talk page, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. In addition, you can spread the sunshine to anyone who visits your userpage and/or talk page by adding ((User:Meaghan/Sunshine icon)). Happy editing! Interstellarity (talk) 19:56, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy first day of summer, Tbhotch!! Interstellarity (talk) 19:56, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

— Maile (talk) 00:03, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply] — Maile (talk) 00:04, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply] Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nominations | July 2021 Backlog Drive
July 2021 Backlog Drive: This Thursday, July 1, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number, length, and age, of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive. Click here to opt out of any future messages. --Usernameunique

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:31, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Seven years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:01, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For Mulan's Reflection song, it seems useful to include either the performing artist or the album cover in the infobox image when there was no singles release. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:37, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

From Template:Infobox song#cover: "Add an image of a sheet music cover, picture sleeve, or other image appropriate for the song." Could you please exemplify another article about a song that is using the performer's picture in the infobox? (CC) Tbhotch^™ 17:29, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That was a good reflection from you on my Talk page. The album cover for the "Live Version" on the Mulan song page at the bottom of that article does feature cover art with the performer featured on it. This is a common approach to 'cover art' generally which often features the original performer. The question here is what to do when there is no singles release, and to ask if it is possible to interpret Wikipedia's policy of "other image appropriate for the song" as including the use of an original performer image when no cover art for the single was ever made. I am answering at length here because this affects several Disney song pages which are peer reviewed like the GA for this Mulan song, and like the "Part of Your World" song for Ariel elsewhere. Is this reasonable? ErnestKrause (talk) 18:42, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sirry Steffen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Selfoss.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That was a left over from when their birthday was listed as 9/11 so I fixed it. --Kuzrock (talk) 01:41, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tbhotch. I'm 110.137.124.134. Can you adding pp-sock in the article Palmer Report? Because IMO, aside from semi-protection due to arbitration enforcement, it also due to sockpuppetry from IP users which reinstated same edit to change UK to US spelling. I hope you can add it because admins forget to add it. Thabk you. 110.137.124.134 (talk) 20:35, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Requests belong to the page's talkpage. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 21:28, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I tried addressing the RD one request at Inside Out (2015 film), but I confess I'm not 100% sure I got the right edits. Don't hesitate to let me know if you think I missed something.--S Philbrick(Talk) 00:27, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unexplained that sources was correct not just in NYC. Saturn 5608 (talk) 00:46, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Abuelita hot chocolate.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:04, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Flybondi logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:29, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well done. I salute you for your goal for telling the world who is gay and who is not. Well done [slow hand clap]. Well done. You must be so proud you have told told the world who is gay. And by inequality making the point they're not straight (because straight articles don't make the same distinction).

His sexuality has no bearing whatsoever on their notability. But you made sure it is there. No wonder there is so much hate on this site.

Labels matter to you. I guess history taught you nothing about yellow stars. Anyway I'm not bothered. You went running to the admins. So I win. You couldn't provide a reason why having the gay label in the article mattered. Instead you quoted made up rules. So I win. I just want you to know what it feels like when encountering a superior mind. Mixing up the sarcasm with brilliant insightful argument. Right back at you. 194.75.10.14 (talk) 17:53, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]