User talk:Magatta

Welcome 21stcenturyrockfan!

Now that you've joined Wikipedia, there are 39,673,205 registered editors!

Hello 21stcenturyrockfan. Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions!

I'm Walter Görlitz, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge.

Some pages of helpful information to get you started:   Introduction to Wikipedia   The five pillars of Wikipedia   Editing tutorial   How to edit a page   Simplified Manual of Style   The basics of Wikicode   How to develop an article   How to create an article   Help pages   What Wikipedia is not

Some common sense Dos and Don'ts:   Do be bold   Do assume good faith   Do be civil   Do keep cool!   Do maintain a neutral point of view   Don't spam   Don't infringe copyright   Don't edit where you have a conflict of interest   Don't commit vandalism   Don't get blocked

If you need further help, you can:   Ask a question

or you can:   Get help at the Teahouse

or even:   Ask an experienced editor to "adopt" you

Alternatively, leave me a message at my talk page or type {{helpme}} here on your talk page and someone will try to help.

There are many ways you can contribute to Wikipedia. Here are a few ideas:   Fight vandalism   Be a WikiFairy or a WikiGnome   Help contribute to articles   Perform maintenance tasks

Become a member of a project that interests you   Help design new templates   Subscribe and contribute to The Signpost   Translate articles from Wikipedias in other languages

To get some practice editing you can use a sandbox. You can create your own personal sandbox for use any time. It's perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put {{My sandbox}} on your userpage.

Please remember to:

• Always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes ~~~~ at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to your talk page, and a timestamp.
• Leave descriptive edit summaries for your edits. Doing so helps other editors understand what changes you have made and why you made them.
  

The best way to learn about something is to experience it. Explore, learn, contribute, and don't forget to have some fun!

Sincerely, Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:12, 10 August 2020 (UTC)   (Leave me a message)

• Español
• Deutsch
• Français
• Italiano
• עברית
• Русский
• 日本語
• Polski
• فارسی

Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:12, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Rock Airplay chart

Hi, please be careful when adding the Rock Airplay chart to tables for songs that reached their peak position on the chart between 2009 and October 2012. The Rock Airplay chart wasn't introduced until October 20, 2012, which was when the Hot Rock Songs changed from becoming an airplay chart to a multi-metric chart using Hot 100 methodology. So Billboard's history of the Rock Airplay chart is identical to the current Hot Rock & Alternative Songs chart June 20, 2009 through October 13, 2012 because they are the same during that time frame. Thanks. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 00:17, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, I agree to take more caution when editing articles about songs in that era from the future, also, regarding that accidental chart deletion I made at Never Say Goodbye, I like to double-check with an artists' chart history on the Billboard website, I recently found out that not all artists' chart entries have been archived and some may have been left out by mistake. Please be assured that I from now on will also check sources properly before changing or removing them. I also noticed you went right ahead and changed those articles I mistakenly edited to their rightful revisions, so great job on that front. Apologies for the errors and apologies if it was a waste of your time rectifying them, and once again thank you for your guidance. 21stcenturyrockfan (talk) 01:12, 4 September, 2020 (UTC)

Based on Billboard's site, you've done things correctly, but it's just that Billboard backdates history when they change chart methodology and names. Like when they added streaming data to the Billboard 200 and created the Top Album Sales chart for pure sales, the history is shown as the same for both charts on their site for dates prior to Top Album Sales existing. Regarding the Hot 100 Airplay, I don't believe Billboard considers earlier incarnations of the Hot 100 Airplay official before BDS technology. They use a chart that debuted in late 1990 called Top 40 Radio Monitor to represent the beginning of the Radio Songs history, which is why it doesn't go back to the '80s (and why you won't find "Never Say Goodbye"), even though they published Hot 100 sales and airplay component charts back then. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 02:11, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Smooth Up In Ya has been accepted

Smooth Up In Ya, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Bkissin (talk) 15:05, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:01, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Wild Child (W.A.S.P. song) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Wild Child (W.A.S.P. song). Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 02:41, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Wild Child (W.A.S.P. song) has been accepted

Wild Child (W.A.S.P. song), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Robert McClenon (talk) 04:59, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Question!

Question. I saw you keep changing my edits. I’m not upset. I’m just curious is all. You do realize that goo goo dolls is a post-grunge band and a lot of those songs and albums have the post-grunge inspiration? If you feel differently let me know and I would love to pick your brain on why you feel the post-grunge shouldn’t be associated? Chase1992 (talk) 00:14, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a policy on changing/adding genres, which can be viewed here, and although you may make them out to be a post-grunge band, others may challenge this point of view if it isn't backed with a reliable source, even if you think the genre is obvious. Please note that adding unreferenced genres may make others believe that it's okay to do the same on other articles, which may result in an edit dispute. If you have any further questions, I would recommend asking the Teahouse. Magatta (talk) 00:24, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Ahh gotcha. Didn’t know that. Appreciate the info! Chase1992 (talk) 00:32, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

June 2021

Were you the one who edited Sad But True? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lonerphoenix93 (talk • contribs)

It was me who undid your recent edit, as it appeard to have added incorrect information. May I ask why you changed it when it was already correct, along with removing content on other articles such as this or this without adequately explaining why? Magatta (talk) 20:20, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Glass Animals

I made the change but the reference is the same that was already there before, so no need to have a new reference. If you look at the reference you'll see that it is consitent with my change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:12C0:A59:816:FE56:37EC:7B61 (talk • contribs) 23:48, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

When I undid your edit, I was talking more about the fact that you altered the sales amount, contradicting the amount stated in the source. It states that "...Dreamland arrives at No. 7 with 60,000 equivalent album units earned. Of that sum, album sales total 43,000, while SEA units total 17,000..." which makes a total of 60,000 sales. Both physical sales and SEA (Streaming Equivalent Album) units were calculated in this case, as many album sales evaluations nowadays incorporate the two formats in the overall total, since it has now become common for people nowadays to stream music instead of buying it. Magatta (talk) 23:48, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Nothing but Thieves

Hey there Magatta, I'm writing in regards to your undo of my Nothing But Thieves article.

I've recently become a huge fan of the band so I thought I can contribute to Wiki with whatever I know about them. At the same time, I'm not a big Wiki author yet so I don't know all the rules.

I added a section about the Itch single sourcing NBT's interview which is present on Spotify. It's them speaking about their songs. How can I better source this? Psfinaki (talk) 23:35, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello once again. Regarding the source, I've done the best I can - added the point in time in the track where the song author is talking about it. I cannot do anything else - this interview was never printed, just uploaded to Spotify by the band itself. It's unfortunately that you don't have Spotify and cannot verify that but there are billions of people with Spotify who can listen to the damn 1-minute track and verify the words. Also, even though you need to sign up you don't need to pay to just listen this particular thing. Psfinaki (talk) 17:30, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Please source all peaks you add to articles

Please source peaks you add to articles, as you did not do so at Twin Atlantic just now. The main UK singles and albums charts have central archives listing all the top 100 peaks an artist achieved like this, but Scotland and the component charts, like the UK Indie charts, do not. You need to source each album's chart position individually. Please remember to do this in future as it's a big problem with UK artists' pages. Thank you. Ss112 18:05, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Of course you can manage to fix an error [1], but yet you couldn't source the peaks in the first place. Makes sense. Ss112 18:07, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

@Ss112 Seeing as you fixed the problem already, I don't see what the big deal is anymore? I now understand the issue with the UK album chart archive and will take note of that in future to make sure that inconvenient edit, which now I realise wasn't properly constructive, will not be repeated. Trust me, I don't like insertion of unsourced/improperly sourced content all the same, but this time I didn't realise that the peak sources where listed individually and assumed it was the same on other discography-related articles, where it was all linked into a single source, so that new albums could be inserted without having to provide an additional source, and I was wrong to do that just now. That error I happened to correct was yours, by the way, so maybe you ought to look out for your own mistakes. Magatta (talk) 18:36, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Are you saying you think I followed up my initial message here thinking you made an error...in a citation I added? My point was you're concerned enough to correct me a minute later because I forgot a numeral yet couldn't source the edits in the first place. I'd rather make a mistake an editor will fix very soon after (as there are editors on Wikipedia who get notices when date errors are made and patrol the site to fix them—no matter though, you fixed it for me less than a minute after I made it!) than add unsourced information in the first place. One's against our policies, the other isn't. I'm glad to know you won't make the same mistake of adding unsourced information again. Thanks for your explanation. Ss112 19:38, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Regarding my edits on "Somewhere I Belong"

I want to absolutely say, the last thing I want to do on edit pages is to go wage war against each other. This kind of thing needs to be avoided at all costs, hence why I came here to your talk page. I need to tell you my perspective of the edits I made on "Somewhere I Belong". I was browsing several Wikipedia pages and wanted to check out chart positions, I did this for Somewhere I Belong after browsing other song articles such as Olivia Rodrigo's "Good 4 U", realising the websites they linked to were completely different. Rodrigo's song as well as other songs that came out in 2021 like Ed Sheeran's "Bad Habits" linked directly to the RMNZ website. The New Zealand charting references were odd to me as Somewhere I Belong's reference went to charts.org.nz, instead of the charting company's website (Recorded Music NZ). I'm aware in my edit arguing my point, I said it went to Top40-charts.com, that was a wrong assumption because the source in the article said "Top 40 Singles", which I thought was a subdivision of a third party website which is clearly not the case on further inspection. I admit and apologise for my mistake and assumption there on my part.

In an effort to construct the source better, I went directly to the official charting website (Record Music NZ) and tried to find the week that the Linkin Park song peaked at number 1. I don't think you realise how difficult this can be to do when there is no artist page. You mentioned consistency, other sources in the same article link directly to their charting company websites (Official Charts Company and Billboard), as well as other articles and it baffles me that the single template for New Zealand doesn't link directly to the charting company website. This is why I notice why the New Zealand charting positions are typically "bloated" as some editors like yourself may say. This is also consistent at this point with other songs that did also chart in New Zealand just in the year just gone. I felt this was the better edit for me to make. I'm aware the other source from the template is acceptable, but it looks more like a third-party collection of charting positions instead of formally being from the website it originates from. I felt my edit was far more improved as a result and it also feels quite frustrating for you reverting an edit that I would say was drastically improved upon.

I hope you can see and understand my point with the edit I made. Rockmusicfanatic20 (talk) 04:50, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

@Rockmusicfanatic20: First off, I understand where you are coming from with the edit and the good faith behind it. As I stated before, the New Zealand source directly links to the Hung Medien archive, which is automatically linked with the macro (or the "single chart") template, which MOS:CHARTS states that "The use of the macro is strongly encouraged, as it automatically creates a correct reference for the chart entry, allows changes to sourcing sites to be accommodated by editing a central location instead of edits across thousands of articles, and will permit future implementation of a bot to assist in vandalism reversion." The same applies to various other countries' chart archives, such as Australia, France, Spain, Sweden and other European countries (see WP:GOODCHARTS) where the entries of other countries compiled by Hung Medien will also be displayed on the page. Whereas manually linking the chart peak to another website when it is already explicitly stated in the aforementioned template just seems unnecessary and that's what I meant by "consistency" with other chart entries, where they are all formatted the same, providing ease of access to people who would go out of their way to verify the sources. I'm not implying you were "incorrect" to change the source, as it wasn't technically wrong, but we should always stick to the Manual of Style. And yes, I totally understand how confusing it can be with sources when the artist doesn't have a page on that source like Billboard and the Official Charts Company.

Additionally, just a piece of advice, when adding future chart peaks in other articles, I would advise using the "single chart" template as often as possible. (This isn't mandatory, if you want to continue sourcing using the manual format style, go ahead, and of course except for charts that don't have a "single chart" template). This will also save you time when sourcing the charts, instead of spending a tedious amount of time applying the manual chart style, where it requires an excess amount of syntax. Thank you for your communication, and I'm glad we were able to discuss this, and I'm open for further discussion if required. Magatta (talk) 14:19, 17 January 2022 (UTC)