User talk:Cornerstonepicker/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Discretionary sanction alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in COVID-19, broadly construed. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

~TNT (she/they • talk) 10:57, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:2016-iHeartRadio-Awards.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:2016-iHeartRadio-Awards.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) 17:30, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Iheartradio2017logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Iheartradio2017logo.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) 22:55, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

December 2021

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.shanghai.^{talk to me} 16:01, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 16

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cardi B, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bloomberg.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

December 2021

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Nicki Minaj. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. I have tried to use the talk page and attempted to create new edits per WP:BRD that take all perspectives into account- you have reverted most of them through edit warring, restoring to the same exact version with no changes to the content as you see fit and removing other content (specifically Billboard's comments on Say So's impact) without policy based reasons. shanghai.^{talk to me} 13:31, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Please reply at Talk:Nicki Minaj#Full protected -- Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 22:17, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

January 2022

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Nicki Minaj. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. You have been trying to block the same content from the same article for months now, consistently. As I suggested to you months ago, to reiterate, I would suggest dropping the stick and moving on. Stop beating the dead horse. shanghai.^{talk to me} 11:21, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Meat Loaf on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:30, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Natasha Bassett on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:30, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

March 2022

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

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
WP:STATUSQUO says: Similarly, if you make an edit which is good-faith reverted, do not simply reinstate your edit. Don't start throwing attacks about not reading guidelines when the very guideline you use tells you to not blindly revert, which is what exactly you're doing. shanghai.^{talk to me} 19:45, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

It's not hard to understand... statusquo is for new edits; and I opened the Talk page, righ there for a click. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 09:09, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

But you keep reverting when the very guideline that you keep citing tells you to NOT blindly revert. The guideline itself has this sentence that you keep ignoring: "If you see a good-faith edit which you believe lowers the quality of the article, make a good-faith effort to reword instead of just reverting it." In fact, there's an entire article that describes your behavior at Nicki Minaj so far. shanghai.^{talk to me} 12:40, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

WP:ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. shanghai.^{talk to me} 16:37, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Women in hip hop.

We need to have a discussion because I really don’t want to do this edit warring. We came to a conclusion on Missy Elliott and Missy Elliott only. While I agree that the title doesn’t belong to one individual person it doesn’t make sense to add it to every single female rappers lead. To their legacy sure, but adding it to all of their leads feels sloppy and dilutes the title especially when they have other achievements, titles and accomplishments that could be added to the lead section. I’m even a fan of some of the women but when it comes to my editing I try to not convey any biases towards them. For instance with Lil Kim she has been cited as the "Queen Bee of Rap" by Billboard, The NYT, BET and many many more. And considering the citations I found went as far back as the 90s it would be more appropriate for her lead section. And the removal of it from the legacy section is completely unjustified, you reverted the whole edit for no good reason. And if that continues I’ll have to get someone else to get involved. As far as Lauryn Hill if you are gonna put that she’s been called the "Queen of Hip Hop" in the lead then you either need to change the wording or put it in a different section along with other accolades. You just slapped it in the middle of a random section in the lead and it makes no sense when reading it.

My problem isn’t with you putting titles in these women's lead section. It’s the fact that you are only willing to have things your way, and that you are doing it in a sloppy manner. Kanyfug (talk) 12:38, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Also to add. I could probably find a decent amount of articles stating that Olivia Rodrigo, Doja Cat or Normani are the "Queen of Pop" should I also put that in their leads? If you think adding it to this many peoples lead section is justified then that would also be justified. Kanyfug (talk) 12:42, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Also as far as Queen Latifah goes. There’s nothing wrong with me adding time accuracy. Most of those citations are from the 1990s and 2000s. One of the citations you have stated that she’s the "Queen of rap's daisy age" not the "queen of rap" and your most recent citation states that she has been referred to as the "Queen of rap", the publication themselves didn’t refer to her as such. Making it an invalid citation since you said "several media articles have referred to her" as such. I’m not debating if Queen of Rap belongs in her lead section. However I believe her legacy section should include time accuracy, and should give too much weight to her musical career considering she has had a equally or bigger career as an actress. Kanyfug (talk) 13:05, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

@Kanyfug: There are numerous sources calling these women that nickname. The thing is, this is an imaginary, not real title. It's not a presidential title, nor an official occupation. There's no reason for it to be removed from all of them, the reasoning you were given here Talk:Missy_Elliott#Queen_of_Rap says it all. And "Queen Bee" is an alias like "Queen Bey", not a title. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 02:33, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

If it’s not a real title that holds no weight, why are you so insistent that every single female rapper has "Queen of Rap" in their leads? I don’t have a problem with the titles but I just don’t believe that it belongs in some of the leads for these women. The legacy section would suffice. And as far as lil Kim, it’s not an alias it is being used as a reference to a literal Queen Bee whereas for Beyoncé, "Bey" is an abbreviation of her name and a play on "Queen Bee". Multiple publications including Billboard, NYTs, and BET have referred to her as the "Queen Bee of Rap", considering that I believe it would be better suited in the lead if you insist on having titles there. Also to make note, Lil Kim herself has often referred to herself as such and even stated that she wasn’t the "Queen of Rap" (Elliott has denied the title too). Again adding it to every single female rapper's lead section feels sloppy and biased. As I mentioned before there’s plenty of new artist with publications giving them honorifics and it would not look great to put them in their lead section. But again I don’t dispute these things being mentioned in the rest of the article. Kanyfug (talk) 03:02, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

that argument can be used to anything we write here, 'why do we we add..'? if nothing is actually real. It is not a Predidential title, and is not essential to just one person. Four people have it, all properly sourced. she used to call herself that alias in all her songs, hence media writers saying 'the queen bee....'. it's not honorific. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 03:11, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

It’s not an alias here’s an example: http://www.bonafidemag.com/cheat-sheets-lil-kim/ Kanyfug (talk) 03:23, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

It is, she uses the alias for her record label Queen Bee Entertainment and for the name of her book Cornerstonepicker (talk) 03:28, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Let’s say that it is indeed an alias. "Queen Bee" would be the alias not "Queen Bee of Rap", please don’t act dense to prove your argument. If publications didn’t add the "of Rap" I would understand your position a bit more. Kanyfug (talk) 03:38, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

but still, the part 'queen bee' is not honorific. rap is her genre. 'queen of rap' is, that's the common one. This is an example, Vanity Fair: "Beyoncé...labeled the Queen Bey of music." not honorific. "Queen of music" would be. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 03:54, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Okay, if that’s your argument fine. But if it’s not a real title and it holds no weight why is it wrong for others to edit and change or add another title to the lead? Why does it have to be "Queen of Rap" or "Queen of Hip Hop" in every mainstream female rappers' lead section. There’s an over saturation of the title being used in the lead. There’s about 5/6 woman with the title in their leads, which is a bit much. Once you start adding it to everyone’s lead section where does it stop? I’m waiting for a genuine answer to this question Kanyfug (talk) 23:47, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

due to the same reason, is not real and not a Presidential occupation. Quoting user Escape Orbit on the Missy Elliott's talk page, debate about how this title compares to how others are known is irrelevant, and amounts to original research. It is not a real position. Quoting The Gnome on the Latifah's talk page we should be able to include in the appellations of persons the terms "king" or "queen - to the extent that they are so called in sources. In so many words, we can have many kings and queens here. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 09:10, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

But wouldn’t that debate include you? I’m genuinely asking. Because anytime I have put another title up you revert it. Kanyfug (talk) 12:46, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

mm I remember you were removing them (?) Cornerstonepicker (talk) 09:09, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

What I’m saying is that if the title isn’t real and doesn’t holds a lot of significant weight as claimed, why does it matter if it’s replaced with another title? Because you seem to shut down or remove any other titles being put in the place of "Queen of hip hop" or "rap" in the lead. And you don’t offer any legitimate reason for this, you also don’t try to find a common ground or solution. Some of the woman have been cited with other honorifics. But for you it has to be those honorifics in particular in the lead or you’ll revert it. Why? Kanyfug (talk) 11:18, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

mm we have already gone through the "queen bee" thing. what other nickname you have added? Cornerstonepicker (talk) 01:43, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Template talk:Infobox musical artist on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:George Strait on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:31, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Bruno Mars Impact section

Hello!

Do you think that a sentence about Meghan Trainor's inspiration on "Just the Way You are" to write "All About That Bass" should be included in this section?

Cheers, MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 13:14, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

@MarioSoulTruthFan: hi! yes it fits, though maybe I'd just put the name among the artists influenced instead of the full sentence. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 02:37, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

I will let you do it as you are more familiarized with the section and will know what fits better. BTW great job you did there! The sentence below is written on the Just Way You are" article.

"The song...and it inspired Meghan Trainor's debut single "All About That Bass" (2014)."

Regarding the Dua Lipa influence, do you think instead of YouTube, this source could be used?

Cheers, MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 11:46, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

@MarioSoulTruthFan: thank you!! I'd been thinking about writing that section for Bruno for a while. In that source Dua doesn't explicitly mention 'inspired' like she does in the video. I'm changing it to an iHeartradio article that features the video. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 01:16, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

You welcome! Good job on both cases. I was wondering since Mars has won Innovator Award, NRJ Artist of Honor and Visionary Award, should these also be included on the impact section? They are non-competitive categories and are only given to artists who have had an impact on the music industry and so on.

Cheers, MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 19:52, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

@MarioSoulTruthFan: I'd add them to "Awards and achievements". Tbh I'm still thinking in which section honors like that fit better. For example, the Taylor Swift article, which is also well organized, have the special awards on "Impact" and the other awards on "Achievements". Cornerstonepicker (talk) 00:05, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Good call, I also look after FA articles to improve this one and indeed Taylor Swift is one of those. I have been thinking about it since you created the section, I feel they would fit better on the Impact section as they are non-competitive categories, unlike most of the awards. and they also show the "Impact" of said artist. As well as, some of the Listicles that are on the Awards and achievements section could be moved here as some are decade influenced. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 12:17, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

That's a good point. I support the idea of the listicles, special honors and decade-end. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 20:00, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

So I added more stuff to the Impact section such as "Artist of the Decade" which was previously on the award and achievements section. I also added some listicles regarding his songwriting to the latter section. Please take a look and if you have more ideas please either add there, correct any spelling/wording/sentence that you would like to, or check the sources... On another note, I'm not sure if I should add the fact that "Uptown Funk" made the cut of various best songs of the decade lists. However, in that case, I would have to add more songs from him. His page already states that the song had an impact worlwide.

Cheers, MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 15:23, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

@MarioSoulTruthFan: there must be several songs from Bruno on those listicles. I think Best of the decade songs belong in Achievements. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 04:41, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

I think its only Uptown Funk and Grenade for decade of course. I will add them then. Thanks for he help so far. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 12:22, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

@MarioSoulTruthFan: you for having the article organized. regards. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 04:25, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

References

Recent RfC closure

In regard to this, a couple points to consider per WP:NHC. First, participation was fairly low. Second, it's more than just a head count, but even if you take that into account (5 agreed, 4 opposed), that's well within the general range of no consensus. So it may be worth considering undoing your closure and requesting that an uninvolved editor perform the close. The other option is to not close it at all and simply start a new RfC, asking the question in a different format following the guidelines more closely at WP:RFCNEUTRAL and pinging the previous participants. An example of how that might look would be:

In the opening sentence of the lead section, is the claim valid that Nicki Minaj is known "for her lyricism"? Some sources specify "lyrics", while others specify "lyricism". It has also been noted by some editors that the term lyricism isn't being used in a way that fits its general definition. Here are some example sources (follow this up with sources that support both points of view).

Options:

A) Valid: keep "lyricism" in the lead

B) Invalid: remove "lyricism" from the lead

C) Modify: change "lyricism" to "lyrics"

Then you would place your opinion which you included in the last RfC header down in a subsection called "Survey" (or you could wait for a few responses before posting, which some editors choose to do out of courtesy). I think in general, it wasn't clear in the last RfC header what was being asked, and then we broke it into a separate discussion with a different set of !votes that made it even more confusing (and probably uninviting).

What are your thoughts? Sound like a reasonable suggestion to get more participation and clearer consensus? --GoneIn60 (talk) 06:30, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:BTS - Mic Drop.jpeg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:08, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Get Up 10 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Get Up 10 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Get Up 10 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 19:49, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Best Life (song) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Best Life (song) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Best Life (song) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 19:50, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of She Bad for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article She Bad is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/She Bad until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 19:51, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of I Do (Cardi B song) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article I Do (Cardi B song) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I Do (Cardi B song) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 19:52, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Halo (TV series) on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:31, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Once Upon a Time in Hollywood on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:31, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Bruno Mars Impact

Hello!

You did an amazing job on this section when you wrote it and we update it together. Recently I have come across this piece of information, regarding "Uptown Funk", "It was the hit that solidified Mars’ kingly pop stature", as it can be seen on [1]. Therefore, I decided to added said information to the first paragraph. However, I'm not sure if it is the most appropriate place for it. There is also a BET interview calling him "Prince of Pop", [2], unsure if it should be added. Feedback will be appreciated.

Thank you, MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 18:29, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Kyle Rittenhouse on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Guy Barker (politician) on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Kron Gracie on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Swiss Broadcasting Corporation on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:30, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Coin Coin Chapter Three: River Run Thee on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:33, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Anderson .Paak on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

You've been unsubscribed from the Feedback Request Service

Hi Cornerstonepicker! You're receiving this notification because you were previously subscribed to the Feedback Request Service, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over six months.

In order to declutter the Feedback Request Service list, and to produce a greater chance of active users being randomly selected to receive invitations to contribute, you've been unsubscribed, along with all other users who have made no edits in six months.

You do not need to do anything about this - if you are happy to not receive Feedback Request Service messages, thank you very much for your contributions in the past, and this will be the last you hear from the service. If, however, you would like to resubscribe yourself, you can follow the below instructions to do so:

1. Go to the Feedback Request Service page.
2. Decide which categories are of interest to you, under the RfC and/or GA headings.
3. Paste {{Frs user|Cornerstonepicker|limit}} underneath the relevant heading(s), where limit is the maximum number of requests you wish to receive for that category per month.
4. Publish the page.

If you've just come back after a wikibreak and are seeing this message, welcome back! You can follow the above instructions to re-activate your subscription. Likewise, if this is an alternate account, please consider subscribing your main account in much the same way.

Note that if you had a rename and left your old name subscribed to the FRS, you may be receiving this message on your new username's talk page still. If so, make sure your new account name is subscribed to the FRS, using the same procedure mentioned above.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask on the Feedback Request Service talk page, or on the Feedback Request Service bot's operator's talk page. Thank you! Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:01, 10 October 2022 (UTC)