User talk:78.145.166.41

May 2022

Hello, I'm Cassiopeia. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Sing for the Moment, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Cassiopeia talk 00:33, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Hi Cassiopeia, I wasn't really able to concisely explain in the edit summary, but looking at the article edit history the content was originally

""Sing for the Moment" deals with the themes of rap music's effect on society and the misunderstanding Eminem claims critics and parents have towards his message. Eminem uses the song to refute critics who have accused him of promoting violence to young people, saying that committing a crime is ultimately up to the offender in a post-9/11 world. He also explains that his music has an advantage for young people, claiming that his music is a relief from boredom and depression. Eminem's altercation with a bouncer named John Guerrera is also referenced in this song.

That's why we seize the moment, try to freeze it and own it - Squeeze it and hold it, 'cause we consider these minutes golden"

The song reached #14 on the U.S. Billboard Hot 100 Singles Chart, #6 on the UK Singles Chart, and #5 on the Australian ARIAnet Singles Chart." and this was later massively trimmed between 2020 and 2022, which left ""Sing for the Moment" deals with a bouncer named John Guerrera is also referenced in this song.

That's why we seize the moment, try to freeze it and own it - Squeeze it and hold it, 'cause we consider these minutes golden"

The song reached #14 on the U.S. Billboard Hot 100 Singles Chart, #6 on the UK Singles Chart, and #5 on the Australian ARIAnet Singles Chart."

This doesn't make any real sense, leading me to conclude the part about the bouncer (which in the original longer version has some context) ought to have been trimmed also. As it stands, the text implies the quoted passage is ABOUT the bouncer situation, which per the original version clearly isn't the case.

References

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Sing for the Moment. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Cassiopeia talk 02:02, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Hi, you removed a sourced edit and added unsourced info and that was the reasons of the above warning. If you want to removed a sourced content, pls state the reason and provide source that indicate that was not the case. If you want to add a content, then provide a source. If the source already in the body text and pls add the source in the edit summary, so we may check. Cassiopeia talk 02:04, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello again Cassiopeia, well evidently we're at cross purposes here and I'm clearly not succeeding in conveying to you what the issue is, so I'll just leave it here. What you're not grasping is: I didn't "remove a sourced edit and add unsourced info" at all. What I DID was attempt to clean up a leftover sentence that wasn't edited out with the rest of the passage from which it came. Look at this diff for an understanding of the situation, please: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sing_for_the_Moment&type=revision&diff=1090200608&oldid=986756022 Having done this, I would then suggest you look at the current phrasing in the article and consider how the original content from 2020: """Sing for the Moment" deals with the themes of rap music's effect on society and the misunderstanding Eminem claims critics and parents have towards his message. Eminem uses the song to refute critics who have accused him of promoting violence to young people, saying that committing a crime is ultimately up to the offender in a post-9/11 world. He also explains that his music has an advantage for young people, claiming that his music is a relief from boredom and depression. Eminem's altercation with a bouncer named John Guerrera is also referenced in this song"- followed by the quoted lyric, this whole passage subsequently edited out leaving only the poorly-worded ""Sing for the Moment" deals with a bouncer named John Guerrera is also referenced in this song" (followed by the quoted lyric) which doesn't actually make any sense, and think about what the purpose is of including this disconnected element, but it's not a hill I'm interested in dying on and I'm not really interested in putting any more effort in to cleaning up this mess. Thanks for your feedback anyway.

I will also observe that it is quite impertinent of you to saturate this talk page with admonitions and to accuse me of "vandalism" etc etc, based on nothing more than your demonstrably imperfect grasp of the situation at hand/ lack of attention paid to my fairly lengthy initial explanation of same, but one comes to expect this precipitate action of Wikipedia, so no hard feelings I suppose.

when an editor add an unsourced content or removed sourced content, then warning messages will be given. If you think the original version is clearly in the article then revert the edit (change the info) but with source to support the content. If you wan to add an content then also provide source. Pls do the edit one by one and state in the edit summary of your edit. The point here is that content added/changed needs to be supported by source and give a brief summary edit so other editor can check your edits. Cassiopeia talk 02:37, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Well, I think we've gone back and forth over this non-issue quite sufficiently now. You, or others, will either improve the article as I've directed above or will not, and I shan't have any further involvement having spent more than enough effort thereupon. Thanks again.

Also, I'm afraid I must- at risk of seeming to indulge in ad hominem criticism- observe that your English is not very clear, and I've been unsure as to exactly what your point is a few times reading what you've typed here. Just a point you might want to bear in mind when interacting with native English speakers in future, as what you're trying to say might not be satisfactorily conveyed. For my part, I must say that you seem to have been unable to understand my explanations, which is not ideal when one such as you comes along and starts finger-wagging.

Sorry that my English is not up to your standard. If you can provide the source then pls do not add or change the content for Wikipedia is all about verification by independent, reliable sources. Cassiopeia talk 06:16, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

See the article talk page for my last word on this matter. Good luck with the English lessons.

Sorry my English is not up to your standard for I have Irene Syndrome. Pls read the article talk page. Pls note that content added or changed need to be supported by independent, reliable source (IRS) for verification. The editor who add the content or change content need to provide the IRS as per Wikipedia guidelines WP:PROVEIT and WP:BURDEN. Cassiopeia talk 01:02, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

I didn't ask about your medical history, and wasn't asking for excuses for why you can't understand this situation. Please refrain from spamming this talk page with repetitious nonsense that is not germane to the situation at hand- this is beginning to look disturbingly like harassment. I'm already done with this whole pointless rigmarole, but if I continue to find you're trying to put pressure on me in this passive-aggressive manner on Wikipedia, I will have to pursue making a complaint about your conduct. I regret to inform you that on examination of our discussion, you will NOT come out well, and so you should take the opportunity to drop this now. This is the point where you come to terms with the fact that we don't see eye to eye, and STOP POSTING addressing me. I have already clearly established in plain, intelligible English that I am no longer interested in the matter previously under discussion. The article remains as you insisted it be, inferior to what it should be, simply because you didn't read/ read but cannot comprehend the explanation provided. I am tired of spending time on it and this conversation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.162.164 (talk) 16:37, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

---