User talk:Carbrera/Archive 2

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

WP:REDDEAL states "In general, a red link should be allowed to remain in an article if it links to a term that could plausibly sustain an article, but for which there is no existing candidate article, or article section, under any name." and also see WP:UNDERLINK for an outline of what should be linked.

If you still feel some links in R2 (Rodalies de Catalunya) fall in that category please engage on the talk page and point out which links instead of a blanket, indiscriminant tag that does not apply to 95% of the article.  MPJ-US  02:25, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

The article Long Way to Go (Gwen Stefani and André 3000 song) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Long Way to Go (Gwen Stefani and André 3000 song) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Aoba47 -- Aoba47 (talk) 21:41, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

I think Loverboy IS SmoothGaga; like the previous socks, they've redirected their userpage to their talk page and their edit summaries seem to mirror the previous socks. livelikemusic talk! 01:48, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Another account made this evening; check out the SPI I opened. This is feeling very much a ducky situation. livelikemusic talk! 04:44, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

I have added some brief comments on the revisions. Once this revisions are addressed, I will past the article. You have done a very excellent job on this article and I am very impressed with all the research put into it. Let me know if you have any questions or comments about my review. Aoba47 (talk) 03:44, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I just wanted to thank you for all of your work on This Is What the Truth Feels Like. I saw that someone was making it difficult for you, and I just want to say that I think you're doing a great job of making sure people who aren't here to edit Wikipedia constructively get blocked. Snugglebear123 seemed like the kind of person that likes to start trouble, so thank you for doing something about that, and for all your hard work on Gwen's pages! MoonlightMusician (talk) 17:16, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

@MoonlightMusician: How did you see that someone was making editing difficult for me? Carbrera (talk) 20:02, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

The edit log. I also saw on your user page that you love Gwen, and are currently trying to "revamp" or "renovate" some of her pages. I appreciate it when people are here to positive contribute to Wikipedia, so thank you for that. MoonlightMusician (talk) 20:43, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

@MoonlightMusician: Give it up. Carbrera (talk) 20:44, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Give what up? MoonlightMusician (talk) 20:45, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

@MoonlightMusician: Everyone literally knows you're a sock. Carbrera (talk) 20:45, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Um, I'm not... I literally saw that Snugglebear123 was reverting all of your edits, so I just wanted to say that I was on your side. If you think I'm a sock, feel free to submit a report on that, but I really don't appreciate the way you're talking to me, considering I am thanking you for something. Also, you may think I'm a sock, but first of all, who am I a sock of? And second, how do you know everyone thinks that? Who else has said that they think I'm a sock? Just a suggestion, you might want to consider saying that people "think" I'm a sock, unless it's been proven. MoonlightMusician (talk) 20:48, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

@MoonlightMusician: You literally just created your account a few days ago, after the sock's ban. Why would you be going through previous contributions of a page you haven't contributed to? It makes no sense to me. The only things that adds up is that you're a sock. Carbrera (talk) 20:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

I actually wanted to help edit the page This Is What the Truth Feels Like, but I realized it was blocked. However, I wasn't sure if "Misery" was a promo single or an actual single, so when you did find confirmation that it was a promo single, I was glad that it got cleared up. I kind of wanted it to be a single, but "Make Me Like You" is still popular I guess. And the reason I just joined is because a lot of albums that I'm looking forward to (Dangerous Woman, TIWTTFL, etc.) are coming out soon, so I want to help with their pages. I'm not sure who you think I'm a sock of, but this is my first account, so I'm not a sock. Again, you may certainly report me if you'd like, I have nothing to hide. MoonlightMusician (talk) 20:55, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Check user will block you if your account matches a sock. Carbrera (talk) 20:56, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

So are you reporting me then? Or will I simply get banned if I am indeed a sock? MoonlightMusician (talk) 20:57, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

The article The Real Thing (Gwen Stefani song) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:The Real Thing (Gwen Stefani song) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Aoba47 -- Aoba47 (talk) 02:01, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Long Way to Go (Gwen Stefani and André 3000 song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page M.I.A.. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:52, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Thegrovevacancy.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 03:14, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Not sure why you reverted my 2nd sourcing on those ages. In publishing, two sources strengthen a fact. And these sites aren't flawless: Alot of them have cut positions so there is no longer as many fact-checkers. Could you explain?--A21sauce (talk) 17:31, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

@A21sauce: I don't see the need for a second source when a good one has already been provided. It's not like that fact was being disputed on the talk page or something; it's clearly been confirmed by the source cited. Carbrera (talk) 23:36, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

The article Used to Love You you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Used to Love You for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Aoba47 -- Aoba47 (talk) 05:41, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing. I have replied to your queries there. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:05, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Carbrera. Long Way to Go (Gwen Stefani and André 3000 song), an article you either created or significantly contributed to, has been nominated  to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 18:25, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 4 in the Morning you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of HĐ -- HĐ (talk) 05:40, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Rare (Gwen Stefani song)

added a link pointing to Idolator

Truth (Gwen Stefani song)

added a link pointing to Idolator

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:20, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

The article 4 in the Morning you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:4 in the Morning for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of HĐ -- HĐ (talk) 10:41, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Carbrera. I just find out how does someone who disagrees vaporwave as the song genre at the article's talk page.

• "this song is not vaporwave its pure edm" — 99.226.66.57
• "The song is not vaporwave, the Chicago Reader source used to source this claim says "it sounds a little like vaporwave". It does not explicitly call it a vaporwave song." "The article is clearly misinterpreting the source." — 178.239.82.8

And Binksternet replied at his own talk page "The source is not strong enough to say this song is vaporwave. The source only says "it sounds a little like vaporwave." There are no other sources calling this song vaporwave, except ones that quote Wikipedia, so I don't see vaporwave as the song's genre."

So I have another two sources regarding another genres instead of vaporwave "caffeine-drunk trap anthem", "the crunchy electro-pop track" 115.164.180.23 (talk) 15:37, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Asking 4 It you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MarioSoulTruthFan -- MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 14:21, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed you have been removing Stargate's middle names from the credits of certain pages. They are credited as their full names on itunes, and should be credited as such here. Please don't change it again. Thank you. DoItToIt7 (talk) 19:22, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

@DoItToIt7: On Stargate's official website, their middle names are not used; why should they be used here? We're not crediting Gwen as Gwen Reneé Stefani. See what I mean? Reach consensus first please on the article's talk page. Carbrera (talk) 20:40, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't go by websites, it goes by iTunes. DoItToIt7 (talk) 21:22, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

@DoItToIt7: One, where does it say that? And two, it's not a website, it's the album's official booklet. Carbrera (talk) 21:25, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

It always goes by itunes, that's just a known fact. And you didn't say it was from the booklet, you said the website. DoItToIt7 (talk) 21:53, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Look at any page with Stargate as the writers, and you will see that they are credited as "Tor Erik Hermansen" and "Mikkel S. Eriksen." Please stop. You are trying to argue something that has never been used. DoItToIt7 (talk) 21:58, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

@DoItToIt7: Stop lying. They are credited without their middle names on the album's official linear notes AND on Stargate's official website. What are you not getting? Please stop your disruptive editing! Carbrera (talk) 22:00, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

What do you mean? I'm not lying! Seriously, go to their discography page, click on any of their songs, and you'll see them credited as what I said. You're the one who's editing disruptively. DoItToIt7 (talk) 22:07, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Carbrera, can I suggest something regarding your GA reviews? Can you try to take the older articles for review whenever you can? That way people who had waited so long ultimately gets rewarded rather than someone who just nominated today. Just a suggestion, feel free to ignore my message :) —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 22:02, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

@IndianBio: Sure, can do. Quick question - do you have any experience of uploading audio files? Carbrera (talk) 22:05, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

I do. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 22:05, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

@IndianBio: I don't know what type of computer (or mobile device) you use, but have you ever used GarageBand for the upload? I'm trying to upload an audio file for "Asking 4 It", and I trimmed it down to comply with Wiki's rules, and I'm about to export it... but what's next? Haha, I'm so rusty. Carbrera (talk) 22:07, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

I use a computer of course haha, but I use this website to convert it and save it on my desktop. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 12:57, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

@IndianBio: Funny you'd say that because that's the exact website I used yesterday. Thanks for your help anyways. Carbrera (talk) 23:16, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. 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.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

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; 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 know this - just walk away.  —SMALLJIM  22:23, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

@Smalljim: Can you help me out? This guy who's been vandalizing my pages is making personal attacks against me and won't stop! I don't know what else to do! Carbrera (talk) 22:24, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Just stop. Leave him alone. It will be dealt with.  —SMALLJIM  22:25, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

@Smalljim: I did request temporary protection momentarily. Thank you for your help. :) Carbrera (talk) 22:26, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

The article Asking 4 It you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Asking 4 It for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MarioSoulTruthFan -- MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 18:21, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

You just need to address the issue of the sample I have raised once you have uploaded the sample, see the credits. That's it. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 19:17, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

@MarioSoulTruthFan: That was completely on accident! I must've been looking at the wrong track # when I entered that information! My bad! I have changed it to be correct. Thanks! Carbrera (talk) 23:15, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

The article Asking 4 It you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Asking 4 It for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MarioSoulTruthFan -- MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 00:41, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Just wanted to say thanks for fixing my mistake. I was trying to get rid of the unnecessary citation, and I didn't realize I removed too much stuff. I edit Wikipedia from my phone, not a computer, so it's a bit harder, haha. NickJonasLover365 (talk) 02:12, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

The article Truth (Gwen Stefani song) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Truth (Gwen Stefani song) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Aoba47 -- Aoba47 (talk) 20:21, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

The article Rare (Gwen Stefani song) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Rare (Gwen Stefani song) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Aoba47 -- Aoba47 (talk) 06:21, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Spark the Fire you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Azealia911 -- Azealia911 (talk) 23:41, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Misery (Gwen Stefani song) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Azealia911 -- Azealia911 (talk) 23:41, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Make Me Like You you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MarioSoulTruthFan -- MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 16:21, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

The article Make Me Like You you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Make Me Like You for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MarioSoulTruthFan -- MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 18:01, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Ok, so I understand we hate each other, but I'd just like to say that I have learned from my mistakes I've made in the past (regarding edit-warring). I know you're obsessed with finding all of my socks, but reverting one or two edits is fine, and has never gotten anyone banned. Couldn't you just let it go if I revert one or two of your edits? Especially considering you reverted my edit 10 times? And stop trying to justify doing that. It wasn't vandalism. My edits were justified. I just feel like it's unfair that every time I revert just one of your edits, you report me. Can't you get some thicker skin? FluffyPandars (talk) 22:17, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

@FluffyPandars: I don't hate you, I'm just very disappointed in your actions. During our first crossover with each other, with you as 'Katycat', if you recall, I forgave you instantly. But that's not all, you continued vandalizing several pages. Twenty-something sock accounts later, you made an account that attacked Livelikemusic and myself, which was not okay. Not okay at all. Please don't post on my talk page; if you have any questions for me, I will address them on the investigation page. Otherwise, this conversation is over. Carbrera (talk) 22:20, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Wow. I figured addressing you on your talk page was more respectful, but whatever. Also, I don't recall you forging me. FluffyPandars (talk) 22:21, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Also, I do believe you hate me. You report me after I make maybe two edits. That's harsh, man. FluffyPandars (talk) 22:22, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

@FluffyPandars: If you don't believe me, here it is: [1] Carbrera (talk) 22:23, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

There was nothing to forgive me for though. I simply made a mistake and accidentally created a page. I thought you forgave me for making a sock account. I really wish, even if you knew I made another sock account, if you could let that go and see if I chose to edit Wikipedia constructively. Like I said, I've learned from my mistakes, just like you. I'd like a second chance, just like you. I don't like being reported every day. And seriously, what did I do wrong with this account? I reverted one of your edits. Just one. In any other situation, that would not be reportable. FluffyPandars (talk) 22:35, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

@FluffyPandars: You've had at least 22 second chances to learn from your mistakes. I'm not buying it. Carbrera (talk) 22:36, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

But I never get a chance to show that because you and LIvelikemusic don't let me! As soon as you think I'm a sock (usually from the pages I edit, which is completely unfair), you report me. And I admit, I've lost my cool with you guys a crapload of times, but it's because you are so unforgiving of me. I tell you what: when I make my next account, I'll come to your talk page and tell you it's mine. Then, if you ever see me edit-war (as in, revert an edit three or more times), you can report me and stay convinced that I haven't changed. HOWEVER, if I don't edit-war for awhile, would it not be safe to say that I have changed? Because edit-warring is what got my first account (Smoore95GAGA) banned in the first place. FluffyPandars (talk) 22:41, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

@FluffyPandars: If it's true that you want another chance, I would contest your indefinite block with an admin like what you did with Snugglebear, and leave it up to them. Their opinion is the most important here. If they think you deserve another chance, they will give you another chance. Carbrera (talk) 22:44, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm talking about with you. An admin did respond to me via email, and told me I had to wait six months, but I don't think I need six months. I think, if given a second chance now, I could show that I've changed. I'm asking for a second chance from YOU, not an admin. FluffyPandars (talk) 22:47, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

This is my new account. I hope you can respect me coming right out and telling you before I make any edits. If you choose to handle this the same way you always do, I'll just make another account, and you know what'll happen next. I really hope you choose to handle this maturely and give me another chance, considering you were given another chance after reverting my edit ten times. The ball's in your court. Hairball...Nasty (talk) 23:05, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

The article Make Me Like You you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Make Me Like You for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MarioSoulTruthFan -- MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 00:41, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

On 29 March 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Long Way to Go (Gwen Stefani and André 3000 song), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that "Long Way to Go" received criticism for its sample of "I Have a Dream"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Long Way to Go (Gwen Stefani and André 3000 song). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:27, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello Carbrera. Thanks for your review for the article I wrote for "Hasta la Raíz", I did all the edits that you suggested, but I was not able to do it in time due to my workload, do I have to renominate the article? Javier Espinoza (talk) 18:33, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for giving me an example on Thank You. Can I ask you though, this user, [[User:Binksternet|Binksternet]} has been reverting my edits claiming that I am committing "block evasion." My edits have been sourced, and now they have reported me. Why is this happening? Hairball...Nasty (talk) 00:28, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

@Hairball...Nasty: You're evading your indefinite block, which is in violation of policy. I told you that you needed to speak with an admin or else things like this would happen. Carbrera (talk) 00:29, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Except this never happened with my other sock accounts. Hairball...Nasty (talk) 00:34, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

So, in other words, if I tell you I'm Smoore95GAGA, I'll get blocked again? Fine. Then I'll just make another account and hope that even if you think I'm Smoore95GAGA, you'll let it go. I keep getting blocked simply because I've been blocked before, not because my edits are vandalism or unconstructive. This is bullcrap. Hairball...Nasty (talk) 00:35, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

@Hairball...Nasty: That's still not how this works. Once you're blocked for SP editing (editing under several accounts abusively), you need to ask admins for permission back on the site with their acceptance. If the admins think you're ready to be back, they'll grant it. Each additional account you make looks really bad, especially after 25 of them have been made within in the past six months. Carbrera (talk) 00:39, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles's 2016 GA Cup - Round 1 Greetings, GA Cup competitors! Wednesday saw the end of Round 1. Sainsf took out Round 1 with an amazing score of 765. In second place, MPJ-DK earned an astounding 742 points, and in third place, FunkMonk received 610 points. In Round 1, 206 reviews were completed, more than any other year! At the beginning of March, there were 595 outstanding nominations in the GAN queue; by the end of Round 1, there were 490. We continue to make a difference at GAN and throughout Wikipedia, something we should all be proud of. Thanks to all our competitors for helping to make the GA Cup a continued success, and for your part in helping other editors improve articles. We hope to see all remaining users fighting it out in Round 2 so we can lower the backlog as much as possible. To qualify for the second round, you needed to make it into the top 16 of participants. Users were placed in 4 random pools of 4. To qualify for Round 3, the top 2 in each pool will progress, and there will also be one wildcard. This means that the participant who comes in 9th place (all pools combined) will also move on. Round 2 will start on April 1 at 0:00:01 UTC and end on April 28 at 23:59:59 UTC. Information about Round 2 and the pools can be found here Also, remember that a major rule change will go into effect starting on April 1, which marks the beginning of Round Two. Round 1 had an issue brought up in the rules, which we are correcting with this clarification. We believe that this change will make the competition more inherently fair. The new rule is: All reviews must give the nominator (or anyone else willing to improve the article) time to address the issues at hand, even if the article would qualify for what is usually called a "quick fail" in GA terms. To avoid further confusion, we have updated the scoring page, replacing the term "quick fail" with the term "fail without granting time for improvements". We expect all reviewers to put a review on hold for seven days in cases such as these as well, in order to apply the same standards to every competitor. The judges will strictly enforce this new rule. Good luck and have fun! Cheers from Figureskatingfan, 3family6, Jaguar, MrWooHoo, and Zwerg Nase. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:38, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Settle Down (No Doubt song) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Azealia911 -- Azealia911 (talk) 17:41, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

I really thought you would change and not report me. Well if you can't forgive me, then I can't forgive you. Way to choose to be immature about this. Also, what producers did I add that weren't sourced, exactly? You just made that up. TheRiddler1 (talk) 21:29, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

@TheRiddler1: Please don't post here anymore. I've asked you nicely. Please stop; if you'd like to communicate with me, ping me on your talk page. If you post here again, I will automatically remove it. Thank you. Carbrera (talk) 21:33, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

First of all, I don't know how to ping someone. Second, I have nothing else to say. I have decided to leave Wikipedia for the six months (so until September 30th), but I will never forgive you. Anytime you try to talk to me about something, I will delete it. You have made Wikipedia awful for me, so I hope you're happy. I've done nothing wrong with this account, you're just the most butthurt person in existence, so fuck you. Bye.

Thanks for uploading File:Make Me Like You.ogg. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:47, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Carbrera:. This is regarding an article that you have chose to review for me; the No Man's Land (Kumi Koda song) article nomination. My apologies for the last message, but I think I have done a really big boo-boo on the article that may be interpreted wrong and later lead onto WP:original research. With all kindness, would you be able to stop the nomination or, if possibe put it on hold for quite a while after you conduct the review (either one).

But maybe you could help me if possible? On the article, its about the controversy/ban about the music video. The source from the video in the article was translated to English with Google Translate (originally in Japanese) that highlighted words like "banned" and "lifting banned", but after stumbling over another article with a similar translation, it didn't look like it was "controversial". In saying this, do you know on Wikipedia if there is anyway to give the source on the article to a Japanese wikipedian or something? I don't really trust the translation through Google, and you reviewing it may hinder my writing about it for the Original Research factor.

I hope this is very concise and easy to understand. Cheers, CaliforniaDreamsFan (talk · contribs} 08:40, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

This is the source I was talking about the banning link. CaliforniaDreamsFan (talk · contribs} 08:54, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

@CaliforniaDreamsFan: Unfortunately, I am not fluent (or even near fluent) in Japanese. [Side story: I have recently been confirmed fluent in Spanish :)] And I do not know of how to contact a Japanese Wikipedian; since you are right about the original research part, I would remove the section entirely, and from the lead as well. My review is almost up so please don't make any changes yet. It's been a good read and I've enjoyed reading it. Carbrera (talk) 02:53, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

The article Spark the Fire you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Spark the Fire for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Azealia911 -- Azealia911 (talk) 12:02, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

The article Misery (Gwen Stefani song) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Misery (Gwen Stefani song) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Azealia911 -- Azealia911 (talk) 12:02, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Carbrera, if you want to engage with that IP editor, please get a room or something; that SPI was getting too crowded. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 01:54, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

@Drmies: It's hard to stop when that user has been making the past two months quite the experience here. Is there anyway the block can become indefinite since the user admitted to being a sock and only here to disrupt Wikipedia? Carbrera (talk) 01:58, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Maybe so but feeding trolls only makes them fatter. Block what indefinitely? The IP? No, we never do that. If they return with the same IP, we'll just block them again, and then for longer. Drmies (talk) 02:07, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

@Drmies: They're already returned. I understand not much can be done. Thanks for your help though. Carbrera (talk) 02:09, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Plenty can be done, but there is no need to template them for sock puppetry, etc. Just ping someone--in this case, Mike V seems to know what he's doing. And see, there's no point in blocking IPs indefinitely. A range block, that's another matter--I don't know if Mike does range blocks; I sure don't. For all I care we block all of Kutztown. Drmies (talk) 02:11, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

@Drmies: Ha, I noticed the Kutztown location too. Thanks for the suggestion. Carbrera (talk) 02:12, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

With this edit, you have restored a link to a copyright violation. The Metrolyrics page for Work from Home lyrics does not contain the LF logo, which means the page is user-generated and unlicensed. See Template:MetroLyrics song for details. Per WP:ELNEVER, copyright violations should never be linked in articles. I have reverted your edit. SSTflyer 03:54, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Would you mind leaving some comments here? I have nominated the article for one or two weeks but there hasn't been any remark on it. Thanks, Simon (talk) 05:04, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

@HĐ: Sorry, I've never done anything like this before. What type of comments should I leave? Carbrera (talk) 22:29, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for looking forward to the GA review of The Amazing Spider-Man 2. As per now, can you review it because its still on pending. Thanks. SuperHero ● 👊 ● ★ 05:55, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Misery (Gwen Stefani song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stephen Bradley. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:03, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing! I have responded to all of your queries at Talk:French fry vending machine/GA1. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:54, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing the article. I have responded to all of your queries at Talk:Testaroli/GA1. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:18, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

• N.b. I have also expanded the article since I posted above; sources available online about the topic have mostly been "used up" at this time. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:52, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Wayzata Bay Center you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf (talk) 10:02, 6 April 2016 (UTC)