User talk:GimmeChoco44

Like Father, like Son (2013 film)

Hi. Please see WP:FILMRELEASE - we only include the first release and then the first domestic release for a film in the infobox. In this case, the Cannes release and then the first release in Japan. As it is not an American film, the US release date is not added. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:47, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you -- I was unaware of that policy. I agree with your resulting edit. Thank you for pointing that out. GimmeChoco44 (talk) 08:18, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Darksaber

Don't mean to interrupt anything. You have anything to help me out over at the Mandalorian talk page for the Darksaber? It's impossible to talk sense into these guys. Any help would be appreciated. --Bold Clone 19:28, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for popping back in, man. I appreciate the clarity and feedback. :) --Bold Clone 19:41, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

re: Near (Death Note)

I noticed and replied there already. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:50, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Revert edit on Babymetal

Hi GimmeChoco44, thank you for your feedback on my edit of the Babymetal article. I consider the events leading to the world tour to be more relevant to the timeline section, but I'm happy to rephrase and move to the reception section if you felt strongly enough to revert. I'm not sure what you mean by simpler form though; the text is quite terse and reference-heavy as it is. What did you have in mind / would suggest instead? Thanks Tpapastylianou (talk) 19:30, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Any parts with "likely prompted in part by" or "Some publications consider" is subjective and doesn't meet the encyclopedic standard. You also don't need more than 2 citations unless you're presenting evidence of contrasting points of view, in which case you need to cite them separately and not all bundled together. Other fact-based elements, such as "this was the band's first ever show booked for outside Asia", need to be presented with a minimum of context without subjective interpretation. While the detailed information may be worthwhile to a dedicated fan of the group, the information has to be essential and not add undue weight to the overall article. ref: WP:UNDUE GimmeChoco44 (talk) 00:08, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

what decides genre of a band?

Why is X Japan a rock band and not a Heavy metal band? Besides the wiki pages of their songs/albums also mention them as Japanese metal/heavy metal band... please answer. 5y6tjapan (talk) 12:08, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The topic was addressed on the Talk page in 2012 and 2019. Consensus is the main genre is rock. All recent media articles from reputable media (ex: Billboard) list the band's genre as rock. Please read the talk page discussions and you can submit current citations there if you feel a change to the main genre is warranted. --GimmeChoco44 (talk) 21:30, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Some bubble tea for you!

Thanks for helping us find that Instagram Live of Utada Hikaru! ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 05:24, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

About plurals for bands

Dear fellow editor, regarding the use of a collective name for the Japanese band Show-Ya, apparently the use of plurals applied to bands is common in British English. The topic was debated many times on Wikipedia and the use of the plural is considered correct. For example, see Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Plurals and the following discussions: Talk:Talking_Heads#American band, American grammar and Talk:Eagles_(band)/Archive_2#Singluar or plural articles. Lewismaster (talk) 23:27, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note, Lewismaster. I'd ask you to refer to American publications like Rolling Stone. In this example from August 2021, the band Aerosmith is positioned as a singular noun with a singular verb. "Aerosmith is part of UMG's partnership with YouTube..."

I appreciate the MOS re: plurals but I don't think it offers a clear decision re band names. --GimmeChoco44 (talk)

I'm sorry, but I think you touched a point not clearly defined or you need to take the long task of changing plurals on many band articles on Wikipedia. Rolling Stone may have its policy for names, but on Wikipedia plural is used for many bands. See The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, Aerosmith, Motörhead, Iron Maiden, Black Sabbath and so on. Maybe a RfC to clear up the matter and modify the MOS would be appropriate. Lewismaster (talk) 07:58, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You can find here a few discussions where the topic was addressed: [1][2][3][4][5][6] Lewismaster (talk) 08:49, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Lewismaster for the links to previous discussions. I don't think either interpretation has been identified as definitive. However, in the interest of avoiding prolonged back and forth, I won't oppose the edit on Show-ya's page if you decide to revert it back to plural. Thank you for a (rare) friendly debate. --GimmeChoco44 (talk) 10:21, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see that the rest of the article uses the plural. Instead of changing it in the whole article, I think that I will revert your change and keep the rest as it is. Thank you. Lewismaster (talk) 16:45, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Peach Momoko has been accepted

Peach Momoko, 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 C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! 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 leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 17:24, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ai o Komete Hanataba o

Hello. I created this page for editor consensus. As I asked you earlier, why do you keep holding on to the previous translation? You ask me for a source but the previous one is unsourced as well. Why have you never deleted those translations if you do not want any unsourced information on Wikipedia? That is the part of your argument that I don't understand the most. --Yashi7090 (talk) 22:40, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Yashi7090: Your latest edit is exactly what we needed, since the citation is from the artist website. This type of correction will avoid further back and forth. When it comes to translations of titles, especially when you add a parenthetical section for interpretation purposes, we set the article up for further debate if/when another editor claiming to be a native Japanese speaker has a different opinion. Now that you have an official source, I don't think any further debate is needed. --GimmeChoco44 (talk) 03:11, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you answered my question, "Why have you never deleted the previous translations?" Clarify the thinking that underlies your actions. Is it prohibited to correct any translation mistakes without a source? What if there is no official English translation at all (which is quite possible)? Most translations on Wikipedia are unsourced. Do you give priority to the first translator's translation for no reason? Because that is what you did. And why do you do that? Should every translation on Wikipedia without sources be deleted, or never be edited without a source? You need to "set the article up for further debate"? How does that work if one of you does not understand Japanese? There is an apparent omission in the phrase "Ai o Komete Hanataba o". On this particular article, yes, I agree that there is no need for any further debate, but I am simply concerned about your future actions regarding translations. Please explain why you kept the previous "unsourced" translations without deleting them. --Yashi7090 (talk) 03:59, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of Dynamite Entertainment titles for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Dynamite Entertainment titles, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Dynamite Entertainment titles until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Todd McFarlane

Hi. Regarding this edit, are you citing the price guide as the source, or that webpage that describes it, which is in your citation? Nightscream (talk) 22:45, 3 November 2022 (UTC)q[reply]

For that particular citation, I'm citing the actual printed price guide book and a specific page. GimmeChoco44 (talk) 00:53, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aisuu

https://cevio.fandom.com/wiki/AiSuu

Some silent siren connected thing if you'd like to add it :) 47.189.13.184 (talk) 09:29, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question Vampirella

What's the issue with some of the comics ? I get if it's too much but a few things connected like year one is connected to Priest run or unholy Angela275 (talk) 23:19, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Listing every series is way too much. That section should be limited to major long-term runs, not separate mini-series. GimmeChoco44 (talk) 04:55, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Acky Bright

Hi, I had to remove your Acky Bright additions from the Anime NYC page as they were uncited. If you can find a non-primary and reliable source you can re-add it to the page. Or because animecons.com doesn't report them as a guest for either year, you might want to submit an update to the site with any sources you have. They're the de facto anime convention information site for guest lists. Esw01407 (talk) 01:31, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure - to avoid every guest on the table having a separate citation, I added the official Anime NYC website pages with guest list for each year. GimmeChoco44 (talk) 04:46, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Acky Bright, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Romance. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:04, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Playboy Interviews moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to List of Playboy Interviews. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. CycloneYoris ^talk! 22:29, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of Playboy Interviews for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Playboy Interviews 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/List of Playboy Interviews 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 until the discussion has finished.

Robert McClenon (talk) 06:38, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've responded in the discussion. There have also been a number of improvements to the page in the first few hours after creation. Based on your comments, I think you'll find this going in the desired direction over the next several days as more editors contribute. GimmeChoco44 (talk) 10:22, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reservoir Dogs

I'm sorry, but how was my edit to Reservoir Dogs any more subjective than the text that had already existed? I'm pretty sure the sources that already existed are also sufficient for what I added, though perhaps I should re-examine them to be sure. Kurtis ^(talk) 13:55, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To call the film a "masterpiece" would require more than one substantial source which uses that exact label, otherwise it falls under WP:NOR. The archived citation does not include this reference. GimmeChoco44 (talk) 18:15, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]